Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Indiana pizza shop refuses to cater gay weddings, instantly has internet presence destroyed

By CBC News, Apr. 2, 2015

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/indiana-pizza-shop-refuses-cater-212030149.html (https://ca.news.yahoo.com/indiana-pizza-shop-refuses-cater-212030149.html)

A pizza parlour that said it will use Indiana's heavily criticized new religious freedom law to deny services to same-sex couples provoked a massive backlash across the internet on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, responded Tuesday to national outrage over the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, by saying he'll "fix" the bill to ensure businesses cannot use the law to deny services to the LGBTQ community.

Is there even a demand for cold pizza at gay wedding receptions?   If they would have just shut their pie holes (punintentional) and kept their bigotry to themselves, there would have been zero backlash. 

Still proud of yourselves?   Any others want to come out of the bigot closet so you can be publically shamed?

Two questions for anti-LGBT hypochristians: In what book of the Bible did Jesus condemn LGBT people, and how many of you have ever been divorced?

It's going to be interesting to see if they can even stay in business now...

C'mon Christians and your allies...go buy a pizza.

Or maybe show your distance from the hate that is done in His name...

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/indiana-pizzeria-at-center-of-religious-115307450604.html (https://www.yahoo.com/tech/indiana-pizzeria-at-center-of-religious-115307450604.html)

They've received around $150,000 in donations since yesterday. Birds of a feather, it seems there are plenty of people willing to support such a close minded attitude. *sighs*

I saw somewhere they had to close their doors because they were afraid of the threats they recieved. I believe this is why the gofundme thing started. However I'm pretty sure they said they aren't sure they'll ever be able to open their doors again. If they had kept their mouths shut they would have been fine. Pizza isn't really a wedding thing. If someone asks just say we don't cater at all.

Quote from: Beth Andrea on April 02, 2015, 02:30:33 PM
It's going to be interesting to see if they can even stay in business now...

C'mon Christians and your allies...go buy a pizza.

Or maybe show your distance from the hate that is done in His name...

I saw an article today that said the shop was losing money fast and was on the verge of bankruptcy.  Maybe this was a way to get some publicity and raise some funds?

Good old Gov. Pence was on a right-wing radio show, a few hours after saying they needed to fix the law, saying it didn't need fixed at all. Typical politician, every time he opens his mouth crap comes out.

How do you know a politician is lying?

Their lips are moving.

" If they would have just shut their pie holes (punintentional) and kept their bigotry to themselves, there would have been zero backlash."

"If they had kept quiet..." (about their deeply held religious beliefs), they would not be suffering the backlash, threats and intimidation by those that so loudly and forcefully demand tolerance for their own views, beliefs and practices.

Is there not some irony and just a bit of hypocrisy in this attitude?  "Just sit down!  Shut up! Believe what "I" say, and I won't rain the wrath of the far left upon you, threaten you, and shut down your business."?

Quote from: Svetlana.K on April 02, 2015, 10:48:41 PM
" If they would have just shut their pie holes (punintentional) and kept their bigotry to themselves, there would have been zero backlash."

"If they had kept quiet..." (about their deeply held religious beliefs), they would not be suffering the backlash, threats and intimidation by those that so loudly and forcefully demand tolerance for their own views, beliefs and practices.

Is there not some irony and just a bit of hypocrisy in this attitude?  "Just sit down!  Shut up! Believe what "I" say, and I won't rain the wrath of the far left upon you, threaten you, and shut down your business."?

No hypocrisy, Svetlana. It's all about who was imposed upon first. "Our side" wanted to buy a product, which they sell to the public. We are part of the public.

By refusing to sell to us, they violated our right to purchase their product..."We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" was ruled unconstitutional many decades ago. If one is in business of selling something, one cannot refuse service to any customer who has the money to pay for it; especially those customers who happen to be in a "protected class" (i.e., race, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, etc).

Refusal to provide the product or service to a protected class is considered evidence of hostility to the individual because of their status in a protected class, who was turned away, which allows them to sue for damages. The business must prove that it did not exhibit bias against the person(s) because they belong to a particular protected class.

So in the eyes of the law (and justice in general, I might add), the business (in this example) was the one who harmed another person; threats of violence are illegal and should be prosecuted, but threats of boycotts and other financial harm are a legitimate form of protest.

Religion must never be used to support or encourage hate, at least...not without consequences.

We are not asking them to accept us, just don't make life miserable for us. And yes, if they make life miserable...then by golly we'll do the same.

But it is not hypocrisy.

imho

There is a fundamental difference.  Refusing to sell generic pizzas to somebody just because they are different is one thing. However, requesting the pizza parlor to host a same sex wedding reception (when you know it is against their belief) is merely discrimination bating as nobody has a wedding reception at a pizza parlor.

Also, for example, a bakery should be permitted to refuse providing a wedding cake with "two men" of "two women" figures on top if it is against their belief even if they provide wedding cakes with "opposite sex" figures on top.  That would be no different from telling a male only shop that it must sell female hygiene products. Telling them what products they may/may not provide is a violation of their rights.

Many claims of discrimination today are charges by a group of people who desire preferential vs equal treatment. Women have succeeded in breaking down barriers by gaining access to all traditionally male clubs and activities while still maintaining their female only ones. Two specific examples (there are many more): (1) Women sports reporters have gained full access to male locker rooms while still banning male reporters from their locker rooms; (2) women have gained full access to male-only exercise clubs while still maintaining female only access to their exercise clubs (Curves is one of them).

EQUALITY IS STILL NOT ALWAYS EQUAL.

If you run a public business you're asking the entire populace to pay for the paving of the road, the plowing of the road, the installation of water and sewer lines to your business, and many more expenses. There is an obligation to serve that populace equally and fairly.

Only wanting to toss pizza for your friends means you have a hobby, not a business.

Hugs, Devlyn

If I were to get married again, I would have pizza at it.


But yeah, I didn't see the point in the people even getting on the news and saying that considering it was so unlikely. They should have just kept doing their business as usual.

I am a bit disgusted at some of the behavior of people going after them though. People demand to be treated with respect, but when they can, they become even worse than those they are against. That stuff needs to be stopped.

The next time I'm in Indiana  ::) I will refuse to eat there

You want good pizza anyway, so go to one run by actual Italians or Greeks or someone from New York. Those have always been the best to me.

Quote from: marsh monster on April 03, 2015, 04:13:56 PM
You want good pizza anyway, so go to one run by actual Italians or Greeks or someone from New York. Those have always been the best to me.

I'm finicky and spoiled, the two closest places here are competitors in an Italian thin crust duel that's been going on for fifty years.

Quote from: Devlyn Marie on April 03, 2015, 04:18:55 PM
I'm finicky and spoiled, the two closest places here are competitors in an Italian thin crust duel that's been going on for fifty years.

We have a Luigis in town that has great thin crust, by the slice or by the pie. Not always real round, but big and so thin. Fold 'em and eat 'em.

I make awesome pizzas and I'm not remotely Italian, Greek or a New Yorker (Go Yankees!).  In fact, I just got a new professional pizza stone yesterday.

I will make pizza for everyone though, even if they are in serious need of a rectocranial extraction.

The last report I saw (today) said their gofundme thing was over $715,000....  Sooooo, I'm guessing they won't be making any pizzas anymore anyway....

http://www.wndu.com/home/headlines/Walkerton-restaurant-says-it-wont-cater-gay-weddings-Concord-coach-suspended-over-tweet-298357751.html

Apparently if you have a mediocre pizza joint in a small town somewhere, come out as a bigot nationally and you'll be set for life.  *sigh*

Correction:  Just looked at their actual gofundme page...  They're at $801,189.

Quote from: AmazinglyAutumn on April 03, 2015, 04:21:25 PM
The last report I saw (today) said their gofundme thing was over $715,000....  Sooooo, I'm guessing they won't be making any pizzas anymore anyway....

http://www.wndu.com/home/headlines/Walkerton-restaurant-says-it-wont-cater-gay-weddings-Concord-coach-suspended-over-tweet-298357751.html

Apparently if you have a mediocre pizza joint in a small town somewhere, come out as a bigot nationally and you'll be set for life.  *sigh*

Think how many starving children that amount of money would feed. I bet the Christian business owner won't...

Quote from: marsh monster on April 03, 2015, 04:25:24 PM
Think how many starving children that amount of money would feed. I bet the Christian business owner won't...

I know right?  That's just crazy...

Quote from: Jill F on April 03, 2015, 04:20:34 PM
I make awesome pizzas and I'm not remotely Italian, Greek or a New Yorker (Go Yankees!).  In fact, I just got a new professional pizza stone yesterday.

I will make pizza for everyone though, even if they are in serious need of a rectocranial extraction.

We'll annoint you with olive oil and make you an honorary Italian!  ;D

Quote from: AmazinglyAutumn on April 03, 2015, 04:29:04 PM
I know right?  That's just crazy...

I would not be surprised to find that the money donated will ruin their lives, or at least complicate it massively. People who publicly receive large amounts of money (usually lottery wins) often find that friends and family expect that they should receive some too "... surely just a few thousand, you have lots and lots, it said so on TV..." and if they say no then "friends and family" quickly become "ex-friends and feuds". If they hand some money out then other people will jump on the band-wagon.

Then there is internal fighting too. One family member might want to give it all away and another wants to keep all of it. Or they might disagree on how it is to be spent.

Large piles of money suddenly arriving out of the blue are not always a good thing.

Quote from: mac1 on April 03, 2015, 03:49:20 PM
There is a fundamental difference.  Refusing to sell generic pizzas to somebody just because they are different is one thing. However, requesting the pizza parlor to host a same sex wedding reception (when you know it is against their belief) is merely discrimination bating as nobody has a wedding reception at a pizza parlor.

There is not a fundamental difference. If the business hosts or caters to marriages at all, then they must do so without regard to any of the "protected classes".

Also, the "nobody has a...reception..." is known as a "only a true Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)" logical fallacy.

Also, for example, a bakery should be permitted to refuse providing a wedding cake with "two men" of "two women" figures on top if it is against their belief even if they provide wedding cakes with "opposite sex" figures on top.  That would be no different from telling a male only shop that it must sell female hygiene products. Telling them what products they may/may not provide is a violation of their rights.

That is exactly the reason there are anti-discrimination laws. Back in the day, there were businesses who would not cater to mixed-race couples. Under your reasoning, if a "whites only" cake maker said it was against his/her religious beliefs to purchase or provide a mixed-race decoration, that would be, and is, blatant discrimination.

Many claims of discrimination today are charges by a group of people who desire preferential vs equal treatment. Women have succeeded in breaking down barriers by gaining access to all traditionally male clubs and activities while still maintaining their female only ones. Two specific examples (there are many more): (1) Women sports reporters have gained full access to male locker rooms while still banning male reporters from their locker rooms; (2) women have gained full access to male-only exercise clubs while still maintaining female only access to their exercise clubs (Curves is one of them).

They have kept female-only organizations because they are still a disadvantaged group.

EQUALITY IS STILL NOT ALWAYS EQUAL.

There will always be inequality, and someone has to give somewhere. Even Christianity does not condemn those who interact with "sinners." In fact, Christ himself would not condemn or refuse to interact with anyone, even prostitutes. But he did condemn the self-righteous who felt they could harm others with the faith.

Since the Christian G-d will not condemn someone for providing a service to a "sinning couple", why should any human refuse based on religious grounds?

Quote from: mac1 on April 03, 2015, 03:49:20 PM
There is a fundamental difference.  Refusing to sell generic pizzas to somebody just because they are different is one thing. However, requesting the pizza parlor to host a same sex wedding reception (when you know it is against their belief) is merely discrimination bating as nobody has a wedding reception at a pizza parlor.

The "wedding" is a non-issue. Completely irrelevant - as are the beliefs of the business owners. If they believe that same-sex relationships are wrong then that is fine. All it means is that they, personally should not enter into a same sex relationship. Their belief does not give them the right to judge others who have entered into a same sex relationship.

The idea that people would order pizza to endorse their relationship, or that the delivery of pizza is an endorsement of those who order it is utterly absurd.

Quote from: dnuwym on April 03, 2015, 04:35:31 PM
I would not be surprised to find that the money donated will ruin their lives, or at least complicate it massively. People who publicly receive large amounts of money (usually lottery wins) often find that friends and family expect that they should receive some too "... surely just a few thousand, you have lots and lots, it said so on TV..." and if they say no then "friends and family" quickly become "ex-friends and feuds". If they hand some money out then other people will jump on the band-wagon.

Then there is internal fighting too. One family member might want to give it all away and another wants to keep all of it. Or they might disagree on how it is to be spent.

Large piles of money suddenly arriving out of the blue are not always a good thing.

Look what happened to Jack Whittaker and his family after he won the lottery...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Whittaker_%28lottery_winner%29

Quote from: dnuwym on April 03, 2015, 04:45:36 PM
The "wedding" is a non-issue. Completely irrelevant - as are the beliefs of the business owners. If they believe that same-sex relationships are wrong then that is fine. All it means is that they, personally should not enter into a same sex relationship. Their belief does not give them the right to judge others who have entered into a same sex relationship.

The idea that people would order pizza to endorse their relationship, or that the delivery of pizza is an endorsement of those who order it is utterly absurd.

Yes, that would be completely unheard of... :laugh:

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1279.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy537%2FDevlynMarie%2F2015-04-03-17-53-55--1497919031_zpsnz5gfkau.jpeg&hash=e3ed0f12e3edb653ce6ed6cbf564e6bd56f338e1)

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1279.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy537%2FDevlynMarie%2F2015-04-03-17-54-06-727274577_zpsrihs7k0j.jpeg&hash=c5bf70b3d1fc25bf193db5e6b9e72df1ad8d3874)

Also: https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,185881.0.html

Hugs, Devlyn

I would refuse to eat their pizza, as if we even need to boycott such a thing...

While I disagree with their position and the law, I don't think that throwing hate at people who may just be naive or lack self awareness is productive.  Some people have hate as their motivation.  Everything I have read about this does not lead me to believe that they were full of hate or sought out an opportunity to make this stand.  They were asked a question from someone in the media and they answered.  These people are hypocritical to be sure, but I feel like the outrage and vitriol towards them was so disproportionate to the statement they made about their beliefs, and it obviously backfired.  These people will be rich now, and the most hateful of comments will be cherry picked and used to mock our own requests for tolerance.  I just feel like more is lost than gained from these social media lynchings.  Working through the business community to demonstrate why discrimination is bad for business was obviously the more effective route to change in Indiana and Arkansas.

Quote from: dnuwym on April 03, 2015, 04:45:36 PM
The "wedding" is a non-issue. Completely irrelevant - as are the beliefs of the business owners. If they believe that same-sex relationships are wrong then that is fine. All it means is that they, personally should not enter into a same sex relationship. Their belief does not give them the right to judge others who have entered into a same sex relationship.

The idea that people would order pizza to endorse their relationship, or that the delivery of pizza is an endorsement of those who order it is utterly absurd.

There are many ways to demonstrate the love in a couple's relationship, ordering a pizza is no worse the a traditional gown-and-tux or even a "Mexican Star Trek (http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Mexican-Star-Trek-themed-wedding-deemed-best-5728692.php)" wedding.

The best way to combat haters is with love

(https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608047325296592373&pid=15.1&P=0)

I have to agree with Kylie on this, very well said. Way to much hate in this world. Lets not give ammunition to a group of people that already hate, but instead lets give them a reason to love and understand. My 2 cents.

Stanna

Warning and only one I will give.  :police:

Back on subject of OP

Its nothing at all to do about pizza,  it is about a protected class of religious freedom having the right under law to discriminate under there religious beliefs.

Ok back to regular scheduled OP topic.

Thanks.

  I believe that a private business has the right to refuse any customer's business for any reason. Even though that owner's decision offends you. It is the case here. There are laws prohibiting refusal of business due to race or gender, but not of one's apparent sexual orientation vs your religious beliefs. There has been cases that Muslim druggists refusing to sell birth control to women due to their religious beliefs that were upheld recently. A lot of that money donated to that pizzeria came from other conservative religious people other than those of the Christians. This is a hot button issue to the conservative Christian, Jewish, Muslim and others who see this as a threat to do business according to their faiths.
  Just go somewhere else.

Joelene

Quote from: Joelene9 on April 05, 2015, 02:50:07 AM
  I believe that a private business has the right to refuse any customer's business for any reason. Even though that owner's decision offends you. It is the case here. There are laws prohibiting refusal of business due to race or gender, but not of one's apparent sexual orientation vs your religious beliefs. There has been cases that Muslim druggists refusing to sell birth control to women due to their religious beliefs that were upheld recently. A lot of that money donated to that pizzeria came from other conservative religious people other than those of the Christians. This is a hot button issue to the conservative Christian, Jewish, Muslim and others who see this as a threat to do business according to their faiths.
  Just go somewhere else.

Joelene

But what happens when this goes far enough to be another case of the civil rights movement in the USA or apartheid in South Africa? "Whites only" can easily turn into a "straights only" sign on most businesses. Where do we draw the line?

If it's something that someone was born into and cannot change about themselves, then it should be protected. That goes for anything like race, gender, or sexual orientation. Businesses can still refuse to serve anyone who chooses to be offensive in their actions, but businesses should not be able to refuse business based on who someone is.

Quote from: Joelene9 on April 05, 2015, 02:50:07 AM
  I believe that a private business has the right to refuse any customer's business for any reason.

Would it be OK, with you if all the businesses in a particular town decided not to serve non-passable trans women? Would they be within their rights?

Quote from: suzifrommd on April 05, 2015, 04:48:51 AM
Would it be OK, with you if all the businesses in a particular town decided not to serve non-passable trans women? Would they be within their rights?

I've seen towns like that you mentioned in the past. Some changed over time while those others became ghost towns. I got a friend who calls himself a "Left wing gun nut" who originates out of southern Indiana and he tells me stories about being raised there. He told us ad infinitum about the racism, the Commie bashing, and the antebellum South mores that was going along along the Ohio river in the 1940s, 50s and 60s. After his Army stint, he moved out of Dodge there and came to Colorado and stayed to this day and he stumps for the democratic candidates, his congressman knows him by sight.  There are a lot of conservative business people who cater to those that don't appeal to their religious beliefs or other prejudices. They have to in areas that do tolerate diversity or they're out of business. This coincides with a well known sign on our local restaurants and grocers that says "No shirt, no shoes, no service". But when I visit the beaches in SoCal, the businesses has a sign that says "No shirt, no shoes, no problem! I still believe that a business can refuse a customer if that customer would make other customers uncomfortable or be an apparent health and safety hazard which is backed by local, state and federal laws.
  As with the Hoosier State, time will tell.

Joelene

Quote from: Joelene9 on April 05, 2015, 01:38:43 PM
This coincides with a well known sign on our local restaurants and grocers that says "No shirt, no shoes, no service". But when I visit the beaches in SoCal, the businesses has a sign that says "No shirt, no shoes, no problem! I still believe that a business can refuse a customer if that customer would make other customers uncomfortable or be an apparent health and safety hazard which is backed by local, state and federal laws.

I'll state it again. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" is a situational thing that people can easily change about themselves by wearing those items. That's fine. Discriminating based on who someone is when they cannot choose differently is not at all on the same level. It is discrimination and should not be legal.

In addition to the overtly hostile and inappropriate reaction by some in the  social media to owner of Memories Pizza inadvertently speaking out publically about their own deeply held religious beliefs, I think that there has been a great deal of 'smearing' and dis-information being spread about the circumstances involved, and then reacted to.

First of all, this law is no  different than laws that already exist in other states as well as being identical to the Federal law passed in 1994 and supported by  Schumer, Pelosi, Obama, as well as many other liberal progressive Democrats.  The law does NOT give an individual the right to discriminate against gays.  What it does do is codify a denial to the State or other subordinate governmental bodies the power to "burden" an individual or business  entity by requiring it to do something which is against the precepts of the owners' religion.  Examples of this would be requiring a Kosher deli to serve pork, or a Muslim owned business to cater a Bar Mitzvah.

It really has nothing to do with gays.  While you or I may or may not agree with the policies or beliefs of the owners of Memories Pizza, I think it is important that we all understand and acknowledge their right to those beliefs. Death threats and hateful remarks on social media does little to encourage tolerance for those beliefs held by many on this forum.

Just because a tiny minority of Americans once abused and mistreated Black people is not a good justification for Black people to abuse or mistreat whites.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

Quote from: Svetlana.K on April 05, 2015, 09:43:34 PM
In addition to the overtly hostile and inappropriate reaction by some in the  social media to owner of Memories Pizza inadvertently speaking out publically about their own deeply held religious beliefs, I think that there has been a great deal of 'smearing' and dis-information being spread about the circumstances involved, and then reacted to.

First of all, this law is no  different than laws that already exist in other states as well as being identical to the Federal law passed in 1994 and supported by  Schumer, Pelosi, Obama, as well as many other liberal progressive Democrats.  The law does NOT give an individual the right to discriminate against gays.  What it does do is codify a denial to the State or other subordinate governmental bodies the power to "burden" an individual or business  entity by requiring it to do something which is against the precepts of the owners' religion.  Examples of this would be requiring a Kosher deli to serve pork, or a Muslim owned business to cater a Bar Mitzvah.

It really has nothing to do with gays.  While you or I may or may not agree with the policies or beliefs of the owners of Memories Pizza, I think it is important that we all understand and acknowledge their right to those beliefs. Death threats and hateful remarks on social media does little to encourage tolerance for those beliefs held by many on this forum.

Just because a tiny minority of Americans once abused and mistreated Black people is not a good justification for Black people to abuse or mistreat whites.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

The law is not identical to the federal law, so you start off on a bad foot right there. There are two important clauses that are not in it and which other states except for South Carolina and Texas have purposefully left out of their laws.  Reason those clauses were left out of most of the state laws?  Yeah, because the wording could lead to discrimination and it takes away the possibility for legal recourse.  I actually think we agree on some of the points here, but you can't call out people for spreading bad information and try to use bad information to do it.

On a separate note, the whole notion of these being "deeply held" beliefs is nonsense.  Everyone makes up their own religion for the most part.  Do you notice that people only take hard lines on issues that don't apply to them personally?  Premarital sex?  Death penalty?  Greed?  Exploitation of the poor?  I could go on and on about the sins "deeply" religious people commit/support but don't take seriously because they take part in them every single day.  There was actually a case on the good wife tonight about a wedding planner who refused to help a gay couple.  The lawyer asked how many times Jesus condemned homosexuality, the answer = 0, the lawyer then asked how many times Jesus condemned divorce, the answer was 2 or 3.  Then the lawyer pointed out that she had aided and abetted numerous divorced people remarry.  I personally don't like this fight, but I like religious exemptions even less because it is all so arbitrary.

Another significant difference in the Indiana law is that it supported religious rights in disputes between individuals. Other such laws are specific to disputes between an individual and the government in relation to the exercise of a law. In other words, it's applicable in civil cases, not just criminal ones.

To give a ridiculous example, in most such states you could claim that your religion barred you from harming vermin and therefore health laws regarding cockroaches in your kitchen did not make you liable to health laws, (if you could somehow prove that government health laws didn't represent the least intrusive government action.) This wouldn't protect you, however, from me suing you over a bug in my soup. In Indiana, you would be protected from me suing you for damages, too.

It all comes down to who's rights apply - Where does one's rights end and the other's rights begin?  The customer has the right to shop where she/he chooses and the business owner also has  the right to serve or not serve the customers they choose the right to provide or not provide products and services of her/his choice.

Correction to clarify

The way it should work is that you shouldn't be able to refuse service to anyone on the basis of religion, gender, race, gender identity. However if they ask for something that makes you uncomfortable you have the right to refuse the specific request. There was a cake shop that was willing to provide a cake to an anti-LGBT person, but they were not willing to put hate speech on it. So that's an acceptable reason to not provide complete service. I would even say the reverse should be true. If someone asks for a pro LGBT message they should have the right to refuse the message but not the service.

Quote from: mac1 on April 06, 2015, 12:42:20 PM
It all comes down to who's rights apply - Where does one's rights end and the other's rights begin?  The customer has the right to shop where she/he chooses and the business owner also has the right to serve or not serve the customers they choose.

Quote from: mac1 on April 06, 2015, 12:42:20 PM
... and the business owner also has the right to serve or not serve the customers they choose.

Yes, but what they cannot do is pick on customers because of innate characteristics. By your logic they could refuse to serve all women simply because they are women. Things used to be done that way for exactly the reason you cite.

I run a business. I will serve anyone unless they request me to break the law in which case I will inform them that their request is illegal and that I will not do it. What I will not do is turn people away because they are female / coloured / gay / red-haired / freckled / one-legged / whatever. I knew when I opened my business that I could not discriminate against customers. That knowledge is part of doing business. If someone wants to discriminate against people then they should go and open a church, not a business.

Quote from: mac1 on April 06, 2015, 12:42:20 PM
It all comes down to who's rights apply - Where does one's rights end and the other's rights begin?  The customer has the right to shop where she/he chooses and the business owner also has the right to serve or not serve the customers they choose.

Remember that the customer pool is always larger than the business pool. Smaller towns might have only one market, with the next prohibitably far away. If that one market refuses to serve an individual what recourse do they have? What if the doctor refuses? Or the police? And what if there are 10 markets and all refuse? It's happened before.

Quote from: Svetlana.K on April 02, 2015, 10:48:41 PM
" If they would have just shut their pie holes (punintentional) and kept their bigotry to themselves, there would have been zero backlash."

"If they had kept quiet..." (about their deeply held religious beliefs), they would not be suffering the backlash, threats and intimidation by those that so loudly and forcefully demand tolerance for their own views, beliefs and practices.

Is there not some irony and just a bit of hypocrisy in this attitude?  "Just sit down!  Shut up! Believe what "I" say, and I won't rain the wrath of the far left upon you, threaten you, and shut down your business."?

I kind of agree with you, which is why I think we better just leave these people alone.

I am NOT a fan of destroying someone with fake, angry reviews on Yelp or something. First of all, a person like me wades through those and looks for the real one. Secondly, the impression you're giving is that we're an angry mob, not civilized people. Is that the impression we want to come across?

A plain old boycott is fine, and I am all for that. That works.