Restaurant Owner Wants The Right To Refuse Service

[Asclepias]

You can call anyone you want a bigot.

Tell me why would you want to patronize any business that was forced to serve you over one that wanted your business?

To see them turn red in the face?

childish

Not as childish as wanting to keep people out of your public business because they are not white. I would love to go there and see the dude turn red when I walk in.

 

[Mac1958]

Yeah, you can try it, but you'll kind of sound like a retard.

I think that it was a law that we put on the books because a long time ago, folks like you who flew Confederate Flags and sputtered about state's rights tried to discriminate. And everyone agreed, Public Accommedation Rules made sense.

Now, if you really want to charge up that hill and say, "I'm fighting for Cleetus' right to not serve black folks," have at it.

You didn't answer my question, Joe, and I think that says it all.

I think blacks are as able as anyone, unlike you racists.

Shame on you.

.

Actually, I did. I'm sorry you didn't understand the answer.

Would it help if I used smaller words.

Here's one.

Been there. Done that. Fixed the country.

You're a racist and a bigot, Joe, face it.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hey, give her credit. At least she's willing to admit that she's a bigot.



Of course, that's required of the PC Police.



.

Is it bigotry? Call someone that doesn't want to serve me a bigot and you get a freak out.

We like to think we are "post racial" and don't need these laws. How often will the "mooslems" be refused service one wonders...

You can call anyone you want a bigot.

Tell me why would you want to patronize any business that was forced to serve you over one that wanted your business?

Tell us that’s really the type of America you want to live in.

And if it is, thankfully you’re in the minority, as a majority of Americans don’t want to have anything to do with such an America, as demonstrated by the Constitution and its case law.

 

[Unkotare]

This entire thread is about whether they should be legal rights. All you said is that they are legal rights because they are legal rights. In reality they aren't legal because the Constitution doesn't grant the federal government authority to regulate hotels or restaurants.

What do you care about the Constitution? You hate this country. Why the hell are you still here?

Are you still crying? ...

No, and I wasn't before. Thanks for asking. Now, why the hell are you still in this country?

 

[Seawytch]

We like to think we are "post racial" and don't need these laws.

"Post racial"?

Dafuq?

All you people SEE is the color of a person's skin.

Was this a serious post?

.

"You people?" Right...it's because "us people" that the Civil Rights Act was (and still is) needed.

 

[JoeB131]

You didn't answer my question, Joe, and I think that says it all.

I think blacks are as able as anyone, unlike you racists.

Shame on you.

.

Actually, I did. I'm sorry you didn't understand the answer.

Would it help if I used smaller words.

Here's one.

Been there. Done that. Fixed the country.

You're a racist and a bigot, Joe, face it.

.

"No, you are" might have been an effective arguing strategy in the fifth grade, Mac-daddy, but you got to try a little harder here.

 

[Mac1958]

We like to think we are "post racial" and don't need these laws.

"Post racial"?

Dafuq?

All you people SEE is the color of a person's skin.

Was this a serious post?

.

"You people?" Right...it's because "us people" that the Civil Rights Act was (and still is) needed.

Perhaps if "you people", the PC Police, would stop exacerbating the situation by cramming race into every situation, constantly screaming "racist" instead of trying to change hearts & minds, you would no longer perceive a need.

But that won't happen, because "you people" are far, far too narcissistic to recognize the damage you're causing.

.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I already told you about your reading problem. The owner wants to do away with an amendment that forbids racial/etc discrimination. Its not that hard or difficult to grasp this concept. I have a legal right to go into any place I want to that provides public access. You as a owner of that institution cannot discriminate against me. You can call your store "white people only" if you choose but i can still come in. Stop crying. Learn how the constitution allows amendments to that same constitution. Until you do those things a 2 year old will find it easy to over come you in a battle of wits.

Yes, you told as again that it's against the law because it's against the law. In other words, you told us nothing.

I've pointed out at least a dozen times that Congress has no authority to regulate restaurants and hotels. You continue to dance around that by stupidly claiming that discrimination is against the law, as if anyone disagrees.

If there were an Amendment to the Constitution that allows Congress to regulate restaurants and businesses, then you might have a point. So far, there isn't, so you simply look like an imbecile.

I told you plenty. You claimed that it was unconstitutional without realizing the constitution allows amendments. You are a dumbass for that. You better thank me for clearing that up for you. You can point, gesture, sing a rally song, and do cartwheels for all I care. There is a law that the owner will abide by or be dealt with. It cracks me up when retards like you cant accept that simple fact of reality.

Another lib who believes the US Constitution exists for their political advantage.
Umm, the Constitution does not "allow for Amendments".
Amendments are added by legislative acts and must be ratified by a minimum of 38 State legislatures.
Now you will respond with the boastful "no shit"....
have at it.
Your misunderstanding of the US Constitution is noted.

 

[thereisnospoon]

We like to think we are "post racial" and don't need these laws.

"Post racial"?

Dafuq?

All you people SEE is the color of a person's skin.

Was this a serious post?

.

"You people?" Right...it's because "us people" that the Civil Rights Act was (and still is) needed.

Oh please.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What do you care about the Constitution? You hate this country. Why the hell are you still here?

Are you still crying? ...

No, and I wasn't before. Thanks for asking. Now, why the hell are you still in this country?

Hmm. Your post is a perfect demonstration of liberal intolerance.
If one does not kowtow to the liberal agenda, they are to be punished.

 

[Asclepias]

"Post racial"?

Dafuq?

All you people SEE is the color of a person's skin.

Was this a serious post?

.

"You people?" Right...it's because "us people" that the Civil Rights Act was (and still is) needed.

Perhaps if "you people", the PC Police, would stop exacerbating the situation by cramming race into every situation, constantly screaming "racist" instead of trying to change hearts & minds, you would no longer perceive a need.

But that won't happen, because "you people" are far, far too narcissistic to recognize the damage you're causing.

.

You must have forgot the OP. This was at least in large part about race/ethnicity. People like you are far, far to ignorant to realize the damage you would do if we allowed you to have your way.

 

[jillian]

We like to think we are "post racial" and don't need these laws.

"Post racial"?

Dafuq?

All you people SEE is the color of a person's skin.

Was this a serious post?

.

that's funny given that "you people" want a return to jim crow.

but keep defending racists. it's all good.

 

[JoeB131]

[


Perhaps if "you people", the PC Police, would stop exacerbating the situation by cramming race into every situation, constantly screaming "racist" instead of trying to change hearts & minds, you would no longer perceive a need.

But that won't happen, because "you people" are far, far too narcissistic to recognize the damage you're causing.

.

Guy, you are trying to pretend race isn't an issue.

But of course it is.

Mostly because most of the levers of power are still held by white men, and even if they aren't outright bigots, they usually are inclined to hire, promote and give good service to those who are like them.

I've already cited, many times the study that shows that a resume with a "black" name is less likely to get a call back than one with a "white" name even if experience is identical.

I want to live in the country where race isn't an issue, but it is, and it isn't because mean old liberals are imposing on your freedom to not servce customers.

 

[Unkotare]

Are you still crying? ...

No, and I wasn't before. Thanks for asking. Now, why the hell are you still in this country?

Hmm. Your post is a perfect demonstration of liberal intolerance.

I try to be tolerant of liberals (well, sometimes). I'm not sure if that idiot considers himself one or not, but he's a douche either way.

 

[Asclepias]

Yes, you told as again that it's against the law because it's against the law. In other words, you told us nothing.

I've pointed out at least a dozen times that Congress has no authority to regulate restaurants and hotels. You continue to dance around that by stupidly claiming that discrimination is against the law, as if anyone disagrees.

If there were an Amendment to the Constitution that allows Congress to regulate restaurants and businesses, then you might have a point. So far, there isn't, so you simply look like an imbecile.

I told you plenty. You claimed that it was unconstitutional without realizing the constitution allows amendments. You are a dumbass for that. You better thank me for clearing that up for you. You can point, gesture, sing a rally song, and do cartwheels for all I care. There is a law that the owner will abide by or be dealt with. It cracks me up when retards like you cant accept that simple fact of reality.

Another lib who believes the US Constitution exists for their political advantage.
Umm, the Constitution does not "allow for Amendments".
Amendments are added by legislative acts and must be ratified by a minimum of 38 State legislatures.
Now you will respond with the boastful "no shit"....
have at it.
Your misunderstanding of the US Constitution is noted.

Another dumbass that has reading comprehension issues. Umm. Yes the constitution does allow for amendments. I see you even described the process but neglected to understand the full impact and import of what you parroted. Come on. You cant really be that stupid can you?

 

[bripat9643]

What do you care about the Constitution? You hate this country. Why the hell are you still here?

Are you still crying? ...

No, and I wasn't before. Thanks for asking. Now, why the hell are you still in this country?

I found your picture on the internet:

 

[Tank]

Liberals are so against a white only business because they know it would be successful, why else would they be so against it?

It is liberals who are the first to move from the city to the suburbs

 

[Mertex]

Except for voting and segregation in public schools, nothing in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to enact such a law. Congress definitely has no authority over "public accommodations."

You are so wrong...do just post what "you think" or do you ever research your beliefs?

When and Where to File a Complaint -- Public Accommodations and Facilities

Federal law prohibits privately owned facilities that offer food, lodging, gasoline or entertainment to the public from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. If you think that you have been discriminated against in using such a facility, you may file a complaint with the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, or with the United States attorney in your area. You may also file suit in the U.S. district court.

- See more at: Discrimination in Public Accommodations: Government Enforcement - FindLaw

I already posted the evidence that the commerce clause does not give Congress the authority to regulate hotels and restaurants.

You can claim it all you want, I don't even think they have to rely on the Commerce clause, it's in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Here.....from your own Faux News.....they could be lying, but this time I don't think so...


The owners of a Christian bakery who refused to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple are facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines after they were found guilty of violating the couple’s civil rights.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said they found “substantial evidence” that Sweet Cakes by Melissa discriminated against the lesbian couple and violated the Oregon Equality Act of 2007, a law that protects the rights of the LGBT community.
Oregon ruling really takes the cake -- Christian bakery guilty of violating civil rights of lesbian couple | Fox News


And, the sad part is that this couple is Christian and they think that Christ would want them to discriminate against another human being. If they believe homosexuality is a sin, then their recourse is not to practice it, but to hate another human being because they think they are committing a sin is not Christian. They would have to discriminate against all people, if they want to use that excuse, because everybody is a sinner and God doesn't count one sin worse than another.

 

[Mertex]

Liberals are so against a white only business because they know it would be successful, why else would they be so against it?

Yes, it would be successful for those that are racist. I thought you and others claim that racist people are liberal and not conservative....why would liberals then go against it?

See how you all are so hypocritical?

It is liberals who are the first to move from the city to the suburbs

But now you are saying that liberals are the ones that don't want "white only" restaurants.
You are thoroughly confused.....you need to get your facts straight.

 

[SwimExpert]

Do you have a link or is that something you heard in your inner circles? I've heard from waiters and waitresses that Christians, on Sunday, after church are the worst tippers....and that's a shame, and that includes all races. That's why I like to tip big....

There are definitely certain demographics, including racially based ones, that are pretty bad tippers. I think, however, that what you are referencing needs to be understood as a crowd as opposed to a single party. The Sunday after-church crowd is certainly the worst group in some ways, because they tend to compose the entire customer base when you see them. You don't just get one table of the church crowd, while the rest of your tables are "regular" people. The entire restaurant fills up with them, your section is full of them, and the constitute the vast majority of the people you will wait on during your shift that day. It is definitely the worst crowd because you get consistently poor tips from just about every one of your customers. To make it worse, they tend to be very demanding. So you've got a full section of exceptionally demanding guests, all shift, all leaving lousy tips. Church goers generally tip in the 7-10 percent range.

Statistically, black people do tend to tip badly. I'd say that ~75% of black people a predisposed to tip no more than 10% regardless of the quality of your service, and 50% will tip 0-5 percent, with many stiffing you. So, when you compare 100 black people to 100 church goers, the black demographic is the "worst" in that you will get the least money overall. But the chances that you will ever have a crowd like this is extremely small. So even if this one table tips you poorly, you have the rest of your section, and the rest of our shift, to help balance it out. Whereas, the church crowd almost always comes as a crowd. You end up with few to no other guests to compensate.


Now, the interesting thing here is that when you compare white church goers to black church goers, there's a reverse trend for both groups. What I mean is that when you get a table, there's a valuation that you begin making as to how much money you will make from that table. It's a process, but it begins instantly when you see that you have a new party. This is just part of how it goes, as pertains to the tipping behavior of certain demographics:


-Table of white people: Most likely 18-20% tip. If you screw up, 50/50 chance your tip will go down.

-Table of black people: Most likely 5% tip. If you screw up, 90% chance your [meager] tip will go down.

**When you greet your table**

-White people are church goers: Tip expectancy goes down to 10%. If you screw up, chance your tip will suffer = slightly increased.

-Black people are church goers: Tip expectancy goes up to 10%. If you screw up, chance your tip will suffer = slightly decreased.

I FULLY REALIZE THAT SOME PEOPLE MAY FIND THIS PREJUDICED AND POSSIBLY RACIST. IN FACT IT IS NEITHER. I SPEAK FROM SEVERAL YEARS IN THE INDUSTRY AND BASED THESE COMMENTS ON CONSISTENT OBSERVATIONS IN MULTIPLE SETTINGS. THIS IS MERELY A STATEMENT OF FACTS AND STATISTICAL EVALUATIONS BASED ON WHAT HAS HAPPENED REPEATEDLY. I AM NOT USING ANY OF THIS INFORMATION TO IMPLY THAT AN INDIVIDUAL'S CHARACTER CAN BE DETERMINED BASED ON CROSS REFERENCING DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS.