I'm curious. In your mind does religion = "gang status"?
I'm guessing this has more to do with muslim ideology, in your opinion, than religion in general...right? I mean you wouldn't make that comparison about Christians?
Muslim denied entry to Oklahoma gun range.
- Thread starter lucas80
- Start date
I'm curious. In your mind does religion = "gang status"?
I'm guessing this has more to do with muslim ideology, in your opinion, than religion in general...right? I mean you wouldn't make that comparison about Christians?
I always like when people demand we ignore a century of line-drawing through legislation and judicial interpretation in order to make extremely broad generalized arguments. Thank you Pepp, thank you.
The idea, as you well know, is that once one "opens themselves to the public marketplace" they must abide by some specific rules of inclusion (or not exclusion, at least). They protect the "normal" things we seem to agree about protecting: Race, gender, political affiliation, religion, etc.
But you knew that.
On the one hand I want to take this as a huge compliment, on the other my nephew's pet snake could be the voice of reason around here on the reg.
I am sorry I disappointed you, I thought we were in the trust tree where we could say anything and people understand it's an anonymous message board and it's all in good fun. Are we not?
It is quite easy as a clear majority to always opine that they would "just go elsewhere", and why would they want to go where they aren't wanted to begin with.
Much harder for a minority with much more limited options to do the same.
I doubt most Iowa Christians would believe the same if HyVee were ran by a muslim denying the same to Christians. Maybe even more so if it was Caseys.
Much harder for a minority with much more limited options to do the same.
I doubt most Iowa Christians would believe the same if HyVee were ran by a muslim denying the same to Christians. Maybe even more so if it was Caseys.
No this is quite serious,....... very, very serious. You seem a bit unhinged. Please let us know why.
Last edited:
Why can night clubs make some people stand in line while others get in? They are, after all, "opening themselves to the public marketplace".
Does this apply to you? I understand you think it's okay to err on the side of freedom when someone else is being discriminated against, but what about a hip new restaurant in your home town that refuses you entry because of your skin color? Would you be cool with that?
Of course it isn't... but yet that's not the only reason the bouncers keep certain people in line while others get inside. You know that to be the case though.
You can also make a claim that allowing somebody to be inside your business creates a legitimate danger to either them or other patrons (why some businesses prohibit biker gang uniforms, etc).
I know better than to walk into an all black restaurant in the deep south. I know better than to go to the Hasidic Jewish neighborhoods in Brooklyn. I know better than to try to mix in with gangster Latinos, neo nazis, Occupy Wall Streeters, etc. Because they don't want me to be part of their group.
I know those things because I have common sense. I know when I'm not welcome and I don't push my way in just because I want to cause trouble and demand the rest of the world cater to me and my difference.
I'm not sure what you are confusing. Are they doing so on the basis of religion? Are you making a gender discrimination argument? Feel free and file for the uglies that can't get in.
I'm just not sure why you think your hypothetical scenario would allow a business to discriminate based entirely, by admission, on religion.
Another strange post. You seem to imply that an "all black restaurant in the deep south" could (and should?) legally deny a white person service because there might be a "legitimate danger". Not only is this, basically, the opposite of the entire legal underpinning of the civil rights movement, but it seems absurd just on its face.
You then add in "gangster" X, neo nazis, and occupiers, all modifications of things that might actually be protected, but specifically modified in a way to create the danger. Which is a weird way to try to make a point.
Denying entry to a "gangster" Muslim likely wouldn't be protected ... because you would be denying them for being a gangster, not a muslim. That is presuming you are using a real definition of gangster, as in some violent criminal.
Lastly, I don't know why you are purposefully confusing what you, personally, will and won't do with what we, as society, have rendered illegal and discriminatory. Sure, YOU might not do X, but that shouldn't and doesn't necessitate what I, or anybody else, might do. Silly to even argue as such.
They certainly didn't like me in Costa Rica, or anywhere down in South America very much. I'm a little awesome to be discriminated.
As usual, in your quest to be the "lawyer" of HROT, you miss the point being made in an individual post.
I am saying that I know where I am and am not wanted. While the CRA might give me the "right" to go to these places and try to mix in, I know I'm not wanted and I am smart enough to avoid them.
It is common sense in many cases. The people who try to fight against the cake baker or the gun range owner are not really wanting to patronize these businesses. They just want to argue about it and make life difficult. They are, in short, real life versions of you on this board.
The dude is a military veteran wanting to use a gun range. Why would he have even known about the sign if he didn't want to go there?
I'm not missing that, it is a stupid, simplistic point because what YOU, personally, want has absolutely no bearing on, well, anything.
Somebody DID, in fact, want to go to the range, and were Muslim. Those are undisputed facts. Are you just now complaining that he wanted to? To what end? So that YOU can claim what they do and don't want to do?
Someone standing up against religious discrimination used to be called a patriot in this country, now they are a rabblerouser. Daily during this election cycle we hear about protecting religious liberty in ads and speeches and whatnot, apparently those liberties only pertain to those who follow the Jesus.
I think you are implying I am not giving personal opinion Pepp, so I will give mine:
This person is, likely, trying to cause a "raucous" politically and socially, but is doing so standing up for Muslim's rights. I applaud that. The backlash against Islam within our borders has been ignorant and silly, growing more so seemingly every day.
If you want to own and operate a business in the public marketplace (see: non-private social club, members only, etc) then you should follow some basic rules which shouldn't be very difficult: Don't discriminate on the basis of religion, race, national origin, sex, political affiliation, familial status, orientation, and maybe some others, but that was off the top of my head.
I have been convinced by this board to make an exception for when the business has to "participate" in something that they don't want to. I would not require that exception to be rooted in religion, only that it be based on "participation".
Whether or not I, personally, would want to do what the aggrieved person is doing makes no difference to me, who cares what I do and don't want to do. It is enough that someone obviously wanted to do it and did.
This person is, likely, trying to cause a "raucous" politically and socially, but is doing so standing up for Muslim's rights. I applaud that. The backlash against Islam within our borders has been ignorant and silly, growing more so seemingly every day.
If you want to own and operate a business in the public marketplace (see: non-private social club, members only, etc) then you should follow some basic rules which shouldn't be very difficult: Don't discriminate on the basis of religion, race, national origin, sex, political affiliation, familial status, orientation, and maybe some others, but that was off the top of my head.
I have been convinced by this board to make an exception for when the business has to "participate" in something that they don't want to. I would not require that exception to be rooted in religion, only that it be based on "participation".
Whether or not I, personally, would want to do what the aggrieved person is doing makes no difference to me, who cares what I do and don't want to do. It is enough that someone obviously wanted to do it and did.
As I posted earlier, much easier to do when you are in the CLEAR majority of, basically, all categories. Harder when you are a distinct minority, especially one who is often discriminated against.
At least she should have understood that she wasn't wanted at the front of the bus and not made a big deal out of it. Sheesh.
I'm not sure what I would do if the place was just "members only" or how to actually control that. Them offering memberships, free (or relatively so), to any non-muslim would clearly be a violation, but would offering memberships for, say, only $100 do the same? I think probably not, I would allow that. It would also depend on how cost is apportioned within. For example, creating a $100 membership, but then tripling the cost of ammunition would clearly violate the spirit of being members only.
I'm not sure, but I'm supportive of even the most discriminatory of private clubs, we all need somewhere to be awful humans.
I'm not sure, but I'm supportive of even the most discriminatory of private clubs, we all need somewhere to be awful humans.
This is rich.
I think many of my con friends are the first to claim denying any person their second amendment rights is a negative for the citizens of this nation. Again...they support the Constitution for what they think it should mean and not for what it says.
I think many of my con friends are the first to claim denying any person their second amendment rights is a negative for the citizens of this nation. Again...they support the Constitution for what they think it should mean and not for what it says.
Those dudes will kick your ass, that's why. They will just curb stomp any non Hasidic Jew they see. The same as restaurants frequented by African Americans. When I lived in the South there were many times I felt lucky to escape the sandwich shop near my office with myself in one piece.
