ADVERTISEMENT

Diner owner refuses SHS service on moral grounds

DgijtEVU8AAZS9v.jpg:orig
 
There is no scenario that puts the baker in the right here. You can't deny service to a protected class based on them being a protected class - Period. The idea is nonsensical. The restaurant owner has a better case because he wasn't denying service to a protected class - but he's still wrong.

He didn't turn them down because of who they are... again, he offered to sell them any other kind of cake.

He turned them down because of the specific purpose of the cake.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate birthdays. I could see a JW baker refusing to bake birthday cakes for that reason, but other types of baked goods would be fine.

Same thing.
 
He didn't turn them down because of who they are... again, he offered to sell them any other kind of cake.

He turned them down because of the specific purpose of the cake.
He makes wedding cakes for straight people. He absolutely turned them down because of who they were. In the jehovah's witness case, they wouldn't bake a birthday cake for anyone. God you're dumb. Or a lib bot designed to make conservatives look stupid... on second thought please proceed sir.
 
That's not what's been stated.

Is this too complicated for you?
Holy shit, you’re a mess. Now you’re denying something you previously wrote in all caps.

The only possible explanation I can think of is that you’re trying to weasel out of it on the technicality that I did not expressly state that it is illegal for her to discuss what happened to her on her official government Twitter feed as opposed to her personal Twitter feed.

I thought that much was already established and didn’t need to be repeated with each successive post. So let’s try it again.

You said you were okay with Obama using his position as President to trash a cop because it wasn’t a “personal experience of his.” It was Obama’s friend and not Obama himself who was arrested. So your obvious implication is that it is an ethics violation to publicly discuss, in an official capacity, something that happens to yourself but it’s a-okay to discuss things that happen to your friends.

Therefore it stands to reason that, while it’s illegal for Sarah to talk about what happened to her on her official government Twitter feed, you would be fine with Sarah using her official government Twitter feed to criticize a restaurant that had denied service to one of her friends.

Now answer the question.
 
Holy shit, you’re a mess. Now you’re denying something you previously wrote in all caps.

The only possible explanation I can think of is that you’re trying to weasel out of it on the technicality that I did not expressly state that it is illegal for her to discuss what happened to her on her official government Twitter feed as opposed to her personal Twitter feed.

I thought that much was already established and didn’t need to be repeated with each successive post. So let’s try it again.

You said you were okay with Obama using his position as President to trash a cop because it wasn’t a “personal experience of his.” It was Obama’s friend and not Obama himself who was arrested. So your obvious implication is that it is an ethics violation to publicly discuss, in an official capacity, something that happens to yourself but it’s a-okay to discuss things that happen to your friends.

Therefore it stands to reason that, while it’s illegal for Sarah to talk about what happened to her on her official government Twitter feed, you would be fine with Sarah using her official government Twitter feed to criticize a restaurant that had denied service to one of her friends.

Now answer the question.

It's ok for Obama to do it because his answer was creative and custom, while SHS was a standard post that you could get from someone else. I'm sure now understand.

If you can make up the rules for a cake maker then why can't Joe make up his own rules.
 
Therefore it stands to reason that, while it’s illegal for Sarah to talk about what happened to her on her official government Twitter feed, you would be fine with Sarah using her official government Twitter feed to criticize a restaurant that had denied service to one of her friends.
Holy shit, you're a mess....
 
Narrator: "Because Whataboutism, using unrelated and vastly different 'examples' never really makes for a solid argument"**

**Except for Russian propaganda
Classic.

“Whataboutism” - JP’s favorite word for avoiding having to explain why he thinks it’s okay for people he likes to do something, but not okay for people he doesn’t like to do the same thing.
 
Classic.

“Whataboutism” - JP’s favorite word for avoiding having to explain why he thinks it’s okay for people he likes to do something, but not okay for people he doesn’t like to do the same thing.
Could you clarify for us, the private restaurant/business that Obama called out?

TIA.
 
The protected class argument applies only if we consider the act of baking a custom wedding cake to be a business of public accommodation. You think it is, I think it is not.

This whole argument boils down to that singular point.
He is a baker. He bakes all kinds of "custom" products. He would bake THEM a "custom" product for any other event according to him. His objection was not to whatever message they wanted on the cake - he refused to even let them CHOOSE a wedding cake. His only objection to them is he doesn't approve of gays marrying. Too bad. His IS a business of public accommodation just like Have It Your Way Burger King.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raglefant
Back to the diner. They are now at a 1.5 on Yelp because people are giving them bad reviews and their Facebook is blowing up.

It is also being reported that the lady followed them across the street to a different restaurant.
 
Back to the diner. They are now at a 1.5 on Yelp because people are giving them bad reviews and their Facebook is blowing up.

It is also being reported that the lady followed them across the street to a different restaurant.

I love the Red Hen, I’ve eaten there several times. I don’t think a bad Yelp review is going to hurt them.
 
No; he called out a municipal policing force. A public entity.
No, he did not call out the entire Cambridge police force. He specifically called out the officer who arrested Gates and even managed to accuse him of racial profiling even though he acknowledged he wasn’t there and didn’t know all the facts.

"I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."
 
No, he did not call out the entire Cambridge police force. He specifically called out the officer who arrested Gates and even managed to accuse him of racial profiling even though he acknowledged he wasn’t there and didn’t know all the facts.

"I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."
Gates deserved to be called out.
 
When their business rep is mainly from locals and word of mouth, it won't bother them a bit.
Yep. Not to mention there are now people who will make a point of dining there specifically because they are happy Sarah got tossed.

The number of new customers they will gain far exceeds the number of potential customers they will lose. This is fantastic free publicity for the restaurant.
 
No, he did not call out the entire Cambridge police force. He specifically called out the officer who arrested Gates and even managed to accuse him of racial profiling even though he acknowledged he wasn’t there and didn’t know all the facts.

"I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."

I don't see any names. I see a police force mentioned, tho.
 
I don't see any names. I see a police force mentioned, tho.
He didn’t mention Crowley by name but it was abundantly clear who he meant. He specifically called out the officer who made the arrest. Crowley is the officer who made the arrest.
 
I guess I believe that both the Red Hen owners and the cake bakers have the right to refuse service to who they want.

I then have the right to think they are both idiots and not do business with either. With social media an entire country can then see what each place is about and have a significant portion of the public avoid those businesses. Free market at its best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rafferty06
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT