Judge rules New York City bar can refuse service to Trump supporter wearing MAGA hat

a reply to: luthier

I think you misread what I wrote because we're in agreement.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: luthier

I think you misread what I wrote because we're in agreement.

I did,..apologies..I think not was a response to someone else. Or an alternate version of your post.

a reply to: eNumbra

So they took his card, opened a tab for him, but didn’t take his drink order?

Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, right?

Well, if I had to guess which of the two are lying, the Trump supporter or the business, my money would be on the Trump supporter. But I've seen enough of those silly hats being stolen, burnt, and stomped on to completely deny the possibility. It's literally a hat with four inoffensive words on it, but the implications of those words are often too dire for some.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff

If people arent forced to deal with people that they hate then intolerance likely wouldnt be an issue because they wouldnt have to tolerate them.

Let's not be silly here. History shows that time and again hate groups have demonstrated a tendency towards violence against people they despise. You are being monumentally naïve if you think that people who are intolerant of others will just leave things alone if you ignore them.

Who decides who needs to acquiesce when theres a conflict?
Governments choosing this instead of the individual leads to things like the Khmer Rouge and the holocaust, its a slippery slope

So because you can name two anecdotes where the government did something bad that means we should never trust the government? What about all the times where the government makes a decision and human liberties and rights aren't infringed? The way I see things, that happens WAY more than the government hate crimes do.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
Remember when a bakery refused a Gay couple a cake, or the Pizza place, or the wedding photographer, and a majority of people said it was their "right" to deny who they wanted, and the people should just find another business, those same people should love and support this now...right

It's a little different. They refused to have their cakes used in something they disagreed with, in this case a gay marriage, which went against their conscience. I doubt you'd be able to find a gay person being refused a birthday cake or any other cake from the same establishment. And yes, they do have that right, just as a bar owner has the right to refuse service to a red cap.

a reply to: Jefferton

Don't confuse laughing at you with liking you.

The only people in the entire world that likes lefties...are lefties.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TheJesuit

But a bakery can refuse to serve a gay couple.
That's just fine.

In the name of consistency, yes... a bakery should absolutely be allowed to refuse service to anyone they wish, same as any business should. I agree with this ruling, but I disagree with the ridiculous double standard. 100% of the risks are on the shoulders of the business owner in all cases, therefor any business owner should legally be within their right to decline services to any customer they believe will either impact their business negatively or cause them or their staff to violate their personal ethics.

I have no more issue with a bar refusing service to a MAGA hat wearer than I do to a bakery refusing to bake a gay wedding cake or a Starbucks telling two freeloaders to leave. I have a major problem with an out of control legal system cherry picking which "customers" are protected and which ones are left to twist, however.

This is pathetic. Really. THIS is what our country has devolved into? If you are triggered or upset by a hat get some f'n therapy and grow a set. The ONLY time apparel is not and should not be allowed in bars or restaurants or public places is if they are gang related/colors/cuts otherwise there is no reason to tell someone to leave.

You have two men loitering and refusing to leave a restaurant who say their rights are violated and have been not only on multiple talk shows but is costing a business millions. This is ok. why? Because they are black. Yeah, I said it. Gays are protected. Blacks. Chinese. Everyone but white males.

Bunch of whiny mofos....

a reply to: matafuchs

Lol. Way to play the race card when this had nothing to do with race.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TheJesuit

But a bakery can refuse to serve a gay couple.
That's just fine.

Last I heard the court ruled against the bakery for discrimination. Why the double standard?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

How am i playing a race card? I am pointing out a truth and you know it. The 'special interest' or the ones who actually use the race card are the ones protected and why? We are ALL the same.

I wonder if they would feel the same in Kanye walked in with his signed MAGA hat on....

a reply to: Murgatroid

Well I'm not going to point out the lack of intelligent discussion by some but....

And @ Simon. If you only like someone because of their political affiliation you live in a small world. BTW what do you do when encountering someone new. Ask, "Are you a frickin leftie"? Or do you just assume and hate automatically?

originally posted by: Konduit

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TheJesuit

But a bakery can refuse to serve a gay couple.
That's just fine.

Last I heard the court ruled against the bakery for discrimination. Why the double standard?

For the third time... because color, sex, sexual orrientation, etc are protected under law. Political affiliation is not. It's not rocket science. Maybe brain surgery for some though.

a reply to: matafuchs

How am i playing a race card?

HAHAHAHAHAHA! Wow that's funny.

Because they are black. Yeah, I said it. Gays are protected. Blacks. Chinese. Everyone but white males.

Those are your words, and no, this has NOTHING to do with the guy's skin color. Any other number of white people go to that bar and get served without being thrown out due to their skin color. You are just adopting one of the weakest persecution complexes I've ever seen on this forum. With zero shame to boot.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Making comparison is not playing the race card. Sitting in an establishment and saying you are kicking me out because I am black is. Get it right.

White Christian Males in the US have been a target for almost a decade to blame EVERYTHING on. The hate of gays. The hate of blacks. The hate of Hispanics.It is driven by the lame-stream media and sadly many elected officials as well as educators. I heard the term white fragility the other day and laughed out loud. It is succeeding with younger kids. They are turning into frightened little boys and girls...

A judge ruling on a hat is a waste of time. The guy who filed the lawsuit should be just as ashamed as the business owner who kicked him out. Grow the F up people....

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Konduit

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TheJesuit

But a bakery can refuse to serve a gay couple.
That's just fine.

Last I heard the court ruled against the bakery for discrimination. Why the double standard?

For the third time... because color, sex, sexual orrientation, etc are protected under law. Political affiliation is not. It's not rocket science. Maybe brain surgery for some though.

My issue there is that none of it should be uniquely protected under the law.
en.wikipedia.org...

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

The existence of uniquely "protected classes" is Unconstitutional and violates the 14th Amendment.