https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201...rising-le/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/..._side.html

Whole section on the Democrats harrassment in RCP. I guess its off limits to sexually harrass women, so they have to harrass somebody.

"...Rush Limbaugh worried aloud on his syndicated show that the increasingly hostile rhetoric and confrontations are heading toward violence. He blamed the media for what he called incendiary coverage of the family separation issue at the border.

“If the media keeps this up — if they keep up generating this hysteria — somebody’s going to get killed,” Mr. Limbaugh said on his show. “I think we’re pretty close to somebody getting killed already, and I’m not being hyperbolic, and I’m not trying to call attention to myself. I’m genuinely worried about the out-of-control aspect of this. The news media’s fanning the flames....”"

"Ari Fleischer, who served as press secretary for President George W. Bush, tweeted Saturday: “I guess we’re heading into an America with Democrat-only restaurants, which will lead to Republican-only restaurants. Do the fools who threw Sarah out, and the people who cheer them on, really want us to be that kind of country?”

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, a frequent critic of the Trump administration, was one of the few Democrats to speak out against the restaurant owner’s actions.

“I think the restaurant owner should have served her. I really do,” Mr. Cummings said on CBS-TV’s “Face the Nation.”"

Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

Passed laws? Link?

Also, I agree with MemTigers1998. If a business wants to be racist....so be it. The free market will take of that way faster than any legislation would. No government can legislate morality. In addition, I'd say making a bigoted POS serve who they don't want to only shoves the problem down further, out of sight. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

There isn't a large amount of 'butthurt' from republicans. I think most people can draw a distinction between potentially forcing someone to violate their religious beliefs and not serving someone simply because you don't like them or who they work for. To me that is the difference in this case, but overall I think any business should be able to refuse service for any reason.

What you are seeing is republicans and conservatives laughing at that inability of liberals to recognize their hypocrisy.

(06-25-2018 08:29 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

I agree. "We have the right to refuse service to anyone". That's the decision of the individual business owner.

Of course, the people they choose not to serve also have the right to tell their friends and neighbors NOT to frequent said establishment.

For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.

How about this?

Just do business. The people who you disagree with have money that's just as green as yours. If you're going to offer a product or service to the public, just STFU and do business.

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

What? Please enlighten us with a link...

(06-25-2018 08:29 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

I respect a business owner's decision to not participate in something like a gay wedding, but the laws that protect it are very vague which leads to stores putting "No Gays Allowed" signs up on one side of the spectrum and also leads to prominent political figures being banned from other establishments on the other side.

It just seems like a bad business model to exclude entire groups of people from your customer base just because you don't agree with them. This whole thing has been stupid from the beginning of the cake incident to now.

(06-25-2018 08:42 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

What? Please enlighten us with a link...

A link to what? The supreme court case?

(06-25-2018 08:45 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:42 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

What? Please enlighten us with a link...

A link to what? The supreme court case?

(06-25-2018 08:44 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:29 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

I respect a business owner's decision to not participate in something like a gay wedding, but the laws that protect it are very vague which leads to stores putting "No Gays Allowed" signs up on one side of the spectrum and also leads to prominent political figures being banned from other establishments on the other side.

It just seems like a bad business model to exclude entire groups of people from your customer base just because you don't agree with them. This whole thing has been stupid from the beginning of the cake incident to now.

Okay, so how is Sarah Sanders eating a meal at a public restaurant in any way like a business being forced by law to participate in a gay wedding?

(06-25-2018 08:39 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

There isn't a large amount of 'butthurt' from republicans. I think most people can draw a distinction between potentially forcing someone to violate their religious beliefs and not serving someone simply because you don't like them or who they work for. To me that is the difference in this case, but overall I think any business should be able to refuse service for any reason.

What you are seeing is republicans and conservatives laughing at that inability of liberals to recognize their hypocrisy.

The name if this thread is "harassment of conservatives" in which there are links to instances where conservatives are mad they aren't welcome at some establishments because of the vague wording in the religious freedom policies and laws that they themselves are proponents of, but the left are the hypocrites...cool....

(06-25-2018 08:45 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:42 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

What? Please enlighten us with a link...

A link to what? The supreme court case?

Yes

(06-25-2018 08:46 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:44 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:29 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

I respect a business owner's decision to not participate in something like a gay wedding, but the laws that protect it are very vague which leads to stores putting "No Gays Allowed" signs up on one side of the spectrum and also leads to prominent political figures being banned from other establishments on the other side.

It just seems like a bad business model to exclude entire groups of people from your customer base just because you don't agree with them. This whole thing has been stupid from the beginning of the cake incident to now.

Okay, so how is Sarah Sanders eating a meal at a public restaurant in any way like a business being forced by law to participate in a gay wedding?

Why should the restaurant be forced to serve someone against their moral beliefs? And no it wasn't a "public" restaurant. It's a private business just like the cake shop.

Oh, wow. Another liberal here to waste the boards time...

(06-25-2018 08:51 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:45 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:42 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

What? Please enlighten us with a link...

A link to what? The supreme court case?

Yes

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17...1_j4el.pdf

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018...tions.html

(06-25-2018 08:46 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:44 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:29 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

I personally, don't really have a problem with it. My belief is that any business should be able to serve who they want and deny anyone they want for any reason.

I respect a business owner's decision to not participate in something like a gay wedding, but the laws that protect it are very vague which leads to stores putting "No Gays Allowed" signs up on one side of the spectrum and also leads to prominent political figures being banned from other establishments on the other side.

It just seems like a bad business model to exclude entire groups of people from your customer base just because you don't agree with them. This whole thing has been stupid from the beginning of the cake incident to now.

Okay, so how is Sarah Sanders eating a meal at a public restaurant in any way like a business being forced by law to participate in a gay wedding?

That's why this was a horrible ruling.

If a person is allowed by the constitution to "object" based on religious beliefs, then that opens the door to object based on other beliefs protected in the constitution.

One's political and personal beliefs would be protected by the same constitution so it's not out of the realm of possibility that a business owner could object to serving a person(s) that go against those beliefs/opinions.

Like I said, how about we just stick to doing business and stop being "outraged" over every person who has an opposing belief that just wants to buy a cake or eat a meal?

Do Restaurants Have the Unrestricted Right to Refuse Service?

No. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly prohibits restaurants from refusing service to patrons on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. In addition, most courts don’t allow restaurants to refuse service to patrons based on extremely arbitrary conditions. For example, a person likely can’t be refused service due to having a lazy eye.

But Aren’t Restaurants Considered Private Property?

Yes, however they are also considered places of public accommodation. In other words, the primary purpose of a restaurant is to sell food to the general public, which necessarily requires susceptibility to equal protection laws. Therefore, a restaurant’s existence as private property does not excuse an unjustified refusal of service. This can be contrasted to a nightclub, which usually caters itself to a specific group of clientele based on age and social status.

So Are "Right to Refuse Service to Anyone" Signs in Restaurants Legal?

Yes, however they still do not give a restaurant the power to refuse service on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. These signs also do not preclude a court from finding other arbitrary refusals of service to be discriminatory. Simply put, restaurants that carry a "Right to Refuse Service" sign are subject to the same laws as restaurants without one.


What Conditions Allow a Restaurant to Refuse Service?

There a number of legitimate reasons for a restaurant to refuse service, some of which include:

Patrons who are unreasonably rowdy or causing trouble
Patrons that may overfill capacity if let in
Patrons who come in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed
Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers looking to sit in
Patrons lacking adequate hygiene (e.g. excess dirt, extreme body odor, etc.)
In most cases, refusal of service is warranted where a customer’s presence in the restaurant detracts from the safety, welfare, and well-being of other patrons and the restaurant itself.

(06-25-2018 08:53 AM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  Oh, wow. Another liberal here to waste the boards time...

Didn't realize this was a conservatives only board. Guess y'all won't serve me because I hold a different view.

Wonder where I heard that before....

(06-25-2018 08:49 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:39 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:23 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Here's the problem: why are conservatives getting butthurt about not being served when THEY are the ones who passed laws allowing business owners to not serve certain customers based on their beliefs? Y'all made your bed, now lie in it.

There isn't a large amount of 'butthurt' from republicans. I think most people can draw a distinction between potentially forcing someone to violate their religious beliefs and not serving someone simply because you don't like them or who they work for. To me that is the difference in this case, but overall I think any business should be able to refuse service for any reason.

What you are seeing is republicans and conservatives laughing at that inability of liberals to recognize their hypocrisy.

The name if this thread is "harassment of conservatives" in which there are links to instances where conservatives are mad they aren't welcome at some establishments because of the vague wording in the religious freedom policies and laws that they themselves are proponents of, but the left are the hypocrites...cool....

Its about an America where people are free to disagree. Its about an effort to destroy the 1st amendment. And the question is where it stops. Violence? Even more concerning is employment discrimination.

The restaurant owners have a right to refuse service to anyone. But its stupid.
People don't have a right to go harrass people like they did the DHS Secretary. And its pretty pathetic that they are calling their friends to go harrass someone. Its concerning that so many people are so filled with hatred.