Restaurant Owner Wants The Right To Refuse Service

[S.J.]

Reading some of the posts here remind how hypocritical the left is.

They say that a business can't refuse to provide a service to some people because of the color of their skin or who they sleep with, yet they say that the same business can refuse to provide a service to me because I carry a firearm.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

It's always been that way. "Do as I say, not as I do".

 

[BillyZane]

Anyone who TRULY believes that the federal government ought be able to tell a private business owner who they may or may not do business with is a retard.

Nowhere in the COTUS does it say a person's rights are abridged if they have a license from the state to take part in some activity.

Does anyone here think a law against cursing while driving would survive a court challenge? Why not, you had to get a license to drive, why couldn't the state regulate your speech?

Same principle you dolts.

 

[Asclepias]

Anyone who TRULY believes that the federal government ought be able to tell a private business owner who they may or may not do business with is a retard.

Nowhere in the COTUS does it say a person's rights are abridged if they have a license from the state to take part in some activity.

Does anyone here think a law against cursing while driving would survive a court challenge? Why not, you had to get a license to drive, why couldn't the state regulate your speech?

Same principle you dolts.

Your principle is a logical fail. You are talking about enforcement rather then merit. if you were able to enforce the law then the case can be made and has merit. Same thing in this situation. We can enforce the law and make this asshole pay for breaking it.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Anyone who TRULY believes that the federal government ought be able to tell a private business owner who they may or may not do business with is a retard.

Nowhere in the COTUS does it say a person's rights are abridged if they have a license from the state to take part in some activity.

Does anyone here think a law against cursing while driving would survive a court challenge? Why not, you had to get a license to drive, why couldn't the state regulate your speech?

Same principle you dolts.

Your principle is a logical fail. You are talking about enforcement rather then merit. if you were able to enforce the law then the case can be made and has merit. Same thing in this situation. We can enforce the law and make this asshole pay for breaking it.

Should Starbucks and other businesses be forced to allow me to carry my firearm into their stores to buy their products?

 

[Mac1958]

What is so appaling in this thread is that they (conservatives) keep claiming that Libs are the racists, but yet, they are the ones defending the right of a business owner to discriminate and have "whites only" posted on their restaurants. Don't they see the contradiction? Apparently not.....

If you're truly appalled, then clearly you have never heard of the quote "I may disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." I must admit I'm a little surprised that you've never heard of it, but it is what it is.

I disagree with him strongly. But I want to know what other people -- especially those with whom I disagree -- are thinking, and I'm not afraid of their words. What I don't understand is why this is such a confusing concept for so many people who are fortunate enough to live in America. Yet I continue to see post after post after post from people who just don't have the strength to tolerate opposing views.

I find THAT appalling.

.

 

[Againsheila]

Why not? It's his restaurant:

Racist Restaurant Owner Refuses To Serve Blacks, Hispanics, Gays And People With Disabilities! - YouTube

I thought we did away with that when we got rid of the Jim Crow laws.

If he wants to refuse service because they're not wearing the appropriate clothing, or because they are rude, then yes, he has a right to refuse service, but not due to any of the reasons you listed above. I can just see what a disabled vet would do if someone refuse him service.....

 

[Mertex]

Reading some of the posts here remind how hypocritical the left is.

They say that a business can't refuse to provide a service to some people because of the color of their skin or who they sleep with, yet they say that the same business can refuse to provide a service to me because I carry a firearm.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

I guess you're not smart to figure it out, so here, let me help you.

The color of someone's skin doesn't rub off on you or cause you cancer, or itching, or anything like that, who a person sleeps with is none of anyone's business unless they are the same person you are sleeping with, but a firearm can cause bodily harm.....especially when being toted by people that don't have a brain cell in their head. It's a safety issue, for the other patrons as well as for the dummy carrying it.

Hope that clears it up for you.......or not......

 

[Mertex]

I just explained it to you, nitwit. Congress claims the Commerce Clause gives it authority to regulate business. That's the only way the provisions on the Civil Rights bill outlawing discrimination by hotels and restaurants could pass Constitutional muster. The only problem with that is that for 150 years the Supreme Court ruled that the commerce clause did not give Congress authority to regulate hotels and restaurants.

I hope that was so clear that even a moron like you could understand it, but then I'm something of an optimist.

Ha,ha, you must be losing because you've already resorted to name-calling....so typical of those who can't handle when they are handed their ass on a platter.

If you are so smart.....post me a link where the Civil Rights Act has been overturned and no longer can charge businesses with discrimination for refusing to serve anyone based on race, color, or gender......I'll be waiting....

And, I already gave you a link to a recent case where a bakery was found guilty of discrimination. If you are so smart and so up to date, post me up a link showing that the Supreme Court has overturned the Civil Rights Act, and then explain how Oregon could find this Bakery guilty......MORAN.

"Duuuhh. You answered my question, but what about answering my question? Oh, you commented on how ******* stupid I sound, re-asking the same question you just answered, so I must be WINNING!"

I guess if you measure your success by how many times you can get people to recognize that you're a moron, you win all the time, huh?

What a ding dong you are.....I didn't realize you and Bripat were the same person, because he was the one I was talking too....I don't remember calling you a moron, but since you assumed I did, I guess it fits......... Now you do sound f'ing stupid.....don't you?

 

[Mertex]

I found your picture on the internet:

That looks more like you.....whiny, can't even debate without crying and calling names....
waaaahhhhhhhh.......somebody call the wambulance for you...

I'm impressed. Most people with your level of brain damage die outright.

Is that why you died?

 

[Asclepias]

Anyone who TRULY believes that the federal government ought be able to tell a private business owner who they may or may not do business with is a retard.

Nowhere in the COTUS does it say a person's rights are abridged if they have a license from the state to take part in some activity.

Does anyone here think a law against cursing while driving would survive a court challenge? Why not, you had to get a license to drive, why couldn't the state regulate your speech?

Same principle you dolts.

Your principle is a logical fail. You are talking about enforcement rather then merit. if you were able to enforce the law then the case can be made and has merit. Same thing in this situation. We can enforce the law and make this asshole pay for breaking it.

Should Starbucks and other businesses be forced to allow me to carry my firearm into their stores to buy their products?

Not even in the same ball park. No one ever died simply because a Black person person was pointed at them. Its not a safety issue. Your gun can be removed. Being Black, disabled, gay etc cannot.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Reading some of the posts here remind how hypocritical the left is.

They say that a business can't refuse to provide a service to some people because of the color of their skin or who they sleep with, yet they say that the same business can refuse to provide a service to me because I carry a firearm.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

I guess you're not smart to figure it out, so here, let me help you.

The color of someone's skin doesn't rub off on you or cause you cancer, or itching, or anything like that, who a person sleeps with is none of anyone's business unless they are the same person you are sleeping with, but a firearm can cause bodily harm.....especially when being toted by people that don't have a brain cell in their head. It's a safety issue, for the other patrons as well as for the dummy carrying it.

Hope that clears it up for you.......or not......

I guess that you are not smart enough to realize that I have the RIGHT to carry the firearm and that in refusing me service, they are violating my rights.

Now if they feel "unsafe" because of that, and that, according to you, gives them the right refuse service.. Then any business owner can claim that they feel "unsafe" if people of a certain color, race, religion, or sexual flavor are in their business and can refuse service to them.

See how that works?

 

[OriginalShroom]

Your principle is a logical fail. You are talking about enforcement rather then merit. if you were able to enforce the law then the case can be made and has merit. Same thing in this situation. We can enforce the law and make this asshole pay for breaking it.

Should Starbucks and other businesses be forced to allow me to carry my firearm into their stores to buy their products?

Not even in the same ball park. No one ever died simply because a Black person person was pointed at them. Its not a safety issue. Your gun can be removed. Being Black, disabled, gay etc cannot.

No one has ever died simply because a gun was pointed at them.

Someone had to pull that trigger.

And guess which race, proportionally, has pulled more triggers resulting in deaths of other people in the U.S. in the past couple of decades?

So your ascertain falls flat on it's face that my firearm in my holster is enough reason to refuse me service.

 

[Asclepias]

Reading some of the posts here remind how hypocritical the left is.

They say that a business can't refuse to provide a service to some people because of the color of their skin or who they sleep with, yet they say that the same business can refuse to provide a service to me because I carry a firearm.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

I guess you're not smart to figure it out, so here, let me help you.

The color of someone's skin doesn't rub off on you or cause you cancer, or itching, or anything like that, who a person sleeps with is none of anyone's business unless they are the same person you are sleeping with, but a firearm can cause bodily harm.....especially when being toted by people that don't have a brain cell in their head. It's a safety issue, for the other patrons as well as for the dummy carrying it.

Hope that clears it up for you.......or not......

I guess that you are not smart enough to realize that I have the RIGHT to carry the firearm and that in refusing me service, they are violating my rights.

Now if they feel "unsafe" because of that, and that, according to you, gives them the right refuse service.. Then any business owner can claim that they feel "unsafe" if people of a certain color, race, religion, or sexual flavor are in their business and can refuse service to them.

See how that works?

See my above response. A gun can kill someone and can be removed. It doesnt matter what race you are the business has a right to ask you to remove it or refuse service. You are not losing anything except your feeling of safety by removing your weapon. Your ethnicity cannot be removed and does not provide a rational expectation of danger.

 

[Mertex]

This isn't a freedom of speech issue.

Running a business isn't "speech". It's a business, and usually, you have to have a business license to do it.

And if one of those requirements of a license is that you have to serve all customers who have the ability to pay for the goods or services, then that is the way that it is.

If you don't like it, don't have a business.

And this is no doubt what bothers you, the notion that you can only have a business as long as society tolerates it.

What is so appaling in this thread is that they (conservatives) keep claiming that Libs are the racists, but yet, they are the ones defending the right of a business owner to discriminate and have "whites only" posted on their restaurants. Don't they see the contradiction? Apparently not.....

I realize that you're a leftist, and therefore so ignorant and narcissistic that you simply cannot imagine the idea of anything outside of yourself and your own personal beliefs and interests. Nevertheless, please try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the concept that conservatives, unlike you, are perfectly capable of respecting someone's rights even if we disagree with - or even despise - the way they choose to express them. We feel no need whatsoever to enslave and suppress others. Why, we even champion YOUR God-given right to be a drooling mouthbreather right out in public any time you like.

You're welcome.

Please explain how you, a knuckle dragging conservative, is capable of respecting someone's rights when you are defending the very position of another knuckle dragger that hates people that don't look like him so much that he wants to have a business supported by tax-payers, and be able to discriminate against some of those tax-payers?

No, never mind, I know you think you are capable, but I don't think that one-cell brain of yours is going to be able to handle it. It is already overflowing with hateful words and bile, one more idea could make it explode...

 

[Vandalshandle]

I used to own a cafe in an office building food court. The only time I ever refused service to anyone was a guy who started screaming at me because I told him he would have to wait five minutes until the break time rush was over before I could prepare his latte. However, there was a guy who came down on a reguilar basis and made racist remarks to his friends, intentionally loud enough for my black employee to hear him. I never said anything to him about it, and neither did she. In fact, she used to give him a little something extra in his sandwich. She did not tell me this, and I did not ask...until I was saying goodby to her after I sold the cafe. I gave her a big hug!

 

[Asclepias]

Should Starbucks and other businesses be forced to allow me to carry my firearm into their stores to buy their products?

Not even in the same ball park. No one ever died simply because a Black person person was pointed at them. Its not a safety issue. Your gun can be removed. Being Black, disabled, gay etc cannot.

No one has ever died simply because a gun was pointed at them.

Someone had to pull that trigger.

And guess which race, proportionally, has pulled more triggers resulting in deaths of other people in the U.S. in the past couple of decades?

So your ascertain falls flat on it's face that my firearm in my holster is enough reason to refuse me service.

Plenty people have died because a gun was pointed at them. Its a pretty much a prerequisite you point that gun at someone if you intend on hitting them.

White people have killed more people in history by gunfire than any other ethnicity hands down. Its not even close. Dont make me laugh.

If the law says the store has the right to refuse you service because you have a weapon then its your problem you cant deal with reality.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"Now if they feel "unsafe" because of that, and that, according to you, gives them the right refuse service.. Then any business owner can claim that they feel "unsafe" if people of a certain color, race, religion, or sexual flavor are in their business and can refuse service to them."

Good luck with that argument at the Supreme Court, councelor!

 

[Statistikhengst]

"Now if they feel "unsafe" because of that, and that, according to you, gives them the right refuse service.. Then any business owner can claim that they feel "unsafe" if people of a certain color, race, religion, or sexual flavor are in their business and can refuse service to them."

Good luck with that argument at the Supreme Court, councelor!

Really, you just can't make this shit up. They really ARE that batshit crazy these days...

 

[Asclepias]

I used to own a cafe in an office building food court. The only time I ever refused service to anyone was a guy who started screaming at me because I told him he would have to wait five minutes until the break time rush was over before I could prepare his latte. However, there was a guy who came down on a reguilar basis and made racist remarks to his friends, intentionally loud enough for my black employee to hear him. I never said anything to him about it, and neither did she. In fact, she used to give him a little something extra in his sandwich. She did not tell me this, and I did not ask...until I was saying goodby to her after I sold the cafe. I gave her a big hug!

Where there any Black guys around to hear this guy?

 

[OriginalShroom]

"Now if they feel "unsafe" because of that, and that, according to you, gives them the right refuse service.. Then any business owner can claim that they feel "unsafe" if people of a certain color, race, religion, or sexual flavor are in their business and can refuse service to them."

Good luck with that argument at the Supreme Court, councelor!

Really, you just can't make this shit up. They really ARE that batshit crazy these days...

I know the left just can't admit it when their hypocrisy is pointed out to them.

Molon Labe