It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should venues deny services to people based on their race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   
this is a important issue because this is the way "we" are getting treated, and not just us gay people, i'm talking about anyone who gets discriminated against, this is how America is turning, it is highly important that people are getting more divided and basing it off of sexuality, race, religion etc.

if a report came out that a store had refused service because someone was pro guns it would turn into a "Liberal Agenda' bashing they are taking our guns and our freedom etc

because this is dealing with someones sexuality it's viewed as "not as important" because he is just whining, he can get over and shop elsewhere?




posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Absolutely, it's really telling that others in this thread think it's absolutely fine for a business owner to say "no blacks, no gays, no gypsies" if they wish.
That is just hideously prejudiced BS and hate wrapped up as protecting freedom. At least have the bollocks to say what you mean, which effectively is that you dont mind a form of segregation and persecution. What about protecting people from hate? If none of you can see where this ends and what it allows people to do, then you have no hope.
Any business owner operates in an area under the laws and codes of that area, and under that of their society as a whole, which at least pretends to have left racism and homophobia, amongst other forms of hate, behind.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
If a business wants to deny service to someone, there are avenues for doing so. Those avenues do NOT include denial based on race, sex, sexual orientation, age, or religious affiliation. Businesses are also not allowed to refuse service arbitrarily.

If the bakery really wanted to refuse service to this gay couple, they should have found a way to do so that was not in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

Also, having a sign that states that the owner has the right to refuse service, does not make it so. They still have to comply with the same laws as any other business.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   

CaticusMaximus
If you are denied service one place, instead of throwing a temper tantrum and screaming and stomping your feet, go to the florist thats 3 minutes away and be done with the whole issue.
edit on 11/6/2013 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)


The problem with that is, what if there isn't another florist in town?

I guess then they don't get any flowers


This is a very, very slippery slope. We've discussed similar topics at great length here on ATS. I remember a wedding cake not being sold to a gay couple not to long ago.

Both sides have valid arguments -- which makes cases like these so difficult. Personally, if a shop owner doesn't want to sell products or services to a certain type of person, they should be required to put up a sign indicating so. For example, "NO SALES TO HOMOSEXUALS".

I think it's only fair. I would hate to get excited over a purchase only to find out the owner has some kind of "mental list" of people he/she won't sell to.

By hanging signs, potential customers would be more informed and could make smarter shopping choices.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Darth_Prime
this is a important issue because this is the way "we" are getting treated, and not just us gay people, i'm talking about anyone who gets discriminated against, this is how America is turning, it is highly important that people are getting more divided and basing it off of sexuality, race, religion etc.


You are most certainly right; everyone is going to be discriminated against by someone. But I think you and others are not looking at this deep enough; it is human nature to discriminate, and you cannot legislate out a trait that has developed over millions of years of physical evolution.

The idea when confronted is just absurd.

It comes down to one thing, and one thing alone for me. Its not about whether its just, or not just. Its not about whether its "right" or "wrong". Its only about whether it is truthful, and honest, or a deceitful illusion that most everyone consents to both allow and help to propagate.

Truth or fiction, is the choice we have to make.

I choose to witness to the suppressed truth, rather than the popular lie.


Darth_Prime

if a report came out that a store had refused service because someone was pro guns it would turn into a "Liberal Agenda' bashing they are taking our guns and our freedom etc


Again youre right. It would turn into that.

Speaking from a very pro-gun stance personally, my response would be the same in that issue as it has been here.


Darth_Prime

because this is dealing with someones sexuality it's viewed as "not as important" because he is just whining, he can get over and shop elsewhere?


Hypothetical pro-gun guy/gal can get over it too.

Truth over lie. If that was the consensus (ironically, the final ruling of the mob), these things would work themselves out naturally in time. Instead issues of discrimination and prejudice are suppressed in the human psyche and not allowed to resolve naturally.

Thats one major factor why the world is so #ed up beyond all recognition now; because nature itself, both external AND internal, is artificially being suppressed, and the result of that failure to flow in harmony with nature is what we have today; a festering sore of a planet with a spiritually and mentally diseased people.

No matter how ugly the truth seems, it is always the path to a higher and more noble manifested ideal.

Coddling the lie will take you where it always has: nowhere.

"If you dont change where youre going, youll probably end up where you are headed."

We know where the lie will take us, because we are already there. It is time to embrace truth if we want to change our course, and accepting what human nature is, and is not, is absolutely vital to establishing a societal paradigm based on truth and honesty, rather than delusion and deceit.



edit on 11/7/2013 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Kangaruex4Ewe
I don't agree with certain folks turning certain other folks away and refusing to do business with them.... but I do live in America. I believe that if you own a business then you should have the absolute right to serve who you want, how you want, when you want, etc.

The decision would then be made by the people. Oh, Rob down the street isn't selling to so and so... we won't shop there anymore either. That is the way it should work. I know it won't be a popular opinion, but it is mine nonetheless.

If I want to open a shop that only caters to ginger people (I jest), then I should be allowed to do it. Would it be a little ridiculous? Yes. Would I miss out on a lot of other business? Yes. Businesses are built on more stupidity than that all the time it seems.

It isn't the way I would run my business.... but if it is the way Joe Jack runs his? Who am I to tell him he can't?
edit on 11/6/2013 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)


Yep. That is the way freedom works.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Considering many stores already discriminate against pro gun people, where do you get that idea?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

skalla
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Absolutely, it's really telling that others in this thread think it's absolutely fine for a business owner to say "no blacks, no gays, no gypsies" if they wish.
That is just hideously prejudiced BS and hate wrapped up as protecting freedom. At least have the bollocks to say what you mean, which effectively is that you dont mind a form of segregation and persecution. What about protecting people from hate? If none of you can see where this ends and what it allows people to do, then you have no hope.
Any business owner operates in an area under the laws and codes of that area, and under that of their society as a whole, which at least pretends to have left racism and homophobia, amongst other forms of hate, behind.


Nonsense. Someone can disagree with a position without demanding there is a law against it and someone can be against laws that force people to do business with someone they do not want to without being a closeted bigot. You logical leap is wrong. I think a private business should be free to refuse service to anyone just as I am free not to give them their business if I find their decision disgusting. The free market will win when they piss off enough people and go out of business.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Darth_Prime
this is a important issue because this is the way "we" are getting treated, and not just us gay people, i'm talking about anyone who gets discriminated against, this is how America is turning, it is highly important that people are getting more divided and basing it off of sexuality, race, religion etc.

if a report came out that a store had refused service because someone was pro guns it would turn into a "Liberal Agenda' bashing they are taking our guns and our freedom etc

because this is dealing with someones sexuality it's viewed as "not as important" because he is just whining, he can get over and shop elsewhere?


Interesting, so did you protest Starbucks's policy of banning legal concealed handgun carriers or at least refuse to give them their business because of this?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
As an American I try to uphold the values set forth by the Constitution...That is everyone is equal and are inherently entitled to all rights set forth in said document. That being said if I sell a service or goods I expect to have the right to refuse my services to whom ever I want. Just like everyone else is free to do as they please so long as it doesn't inhibit anyone else from the same. So be gay or a nazi or christian I don't care...but if I don't agree with it what right does anyone have to force me to serve those people. How can anyone argue that they have a right to force me to do anything. If people don't like how someone runs their business or life don't associate with them. I can assure you there is no service out there you can't find tons of people offering. Also the beautiful thing about living in the US is how all the states are different. If your gay and live somewhere the majority are gay bashing christians maybe you should move. Just like how I hated Virginia's laws and major conservative corrupt police/judicial system where I grew up. As soon as I could move I did. I didn't argue the majority should conform to my views because it was my right to believe as such and they should make that convenient for me or set aside their views to accommodate mine. It's up to me to make it work for myself. God people these days are so damn entitled to everything. People NO ONE OWES YOU ANYTHING or do they HAVE to care what so ever about you or what you want. If you don't like it it's up to you to find a solution not me or anyone else.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


this is one "Thin Ice" kind of questions...
can a private business owner deny service???

So what if say this wasn't a gay couple but I well known rapist who walked into a store to buy guns, ammo, rope and duct tape and a ball gag???

would I be right to deny the sale ????

don't give me that apples and oranges crap...
the question is at what point can government or body/mob of people dictate terms to a private business owner who they will and will not serve???

BTW I was once told I had to provide services to a convicted and jailed child rapist or risk losing my state contract... Today I'm semi retired... I just would not be pushed into working with someone that goes against everything I believed in... that was my choice to make and I walked away



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Another thought...

Not engaging in commerce with someone because the owner's religion tells them homosexuality is wrong is just stupid. Does anyone really think Jesus himself would have a problem? How is selling flowers or a cake to someone who's gay make the owner less of a Christian or whatever faith they are?

Is the owner going to catch something from selling a product to a gay person?

If I sold donuts and some skinheads walked in, I'd sell them donuts (as long as they were polite and non-disruptive). Who they are and what their values are is none of my business. My business is to make money selling a product.

Selling something to someone who I can't stand doesn't make me a worse person -- in fact I would say it makes you a better person, you chose to look beyond your prejudices. Also, it makes you a good capitalist, and we all know how many staunch conservative/pro-capitalist members there are here!



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Why would we erase 50 years of hard work by civil right leaders who fought hard so everyone in this country could live their life without being discriminated based on the color of their skin or sexual orientation?

It's such a shame that the pro-prejudice and pro-discrimination sentiment is still very popular amongst a large portion of the population



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Yep. Jesus was all about doing business with the people nobody wanted around. You know how everywhere Jesus went it seemed like somebody was complaining that he hangs out with "drunkards and gluttons"? I don't claim to be a theologian but when it suits there purposes, many Christian ministers will tell you that this was essentially saying, "Hey, have you noticed that your teacher spends all his time partying with unmarried middle aged men? Are you sure he's not... you know..."

Sorry Jesus, if you want flowers you better send Mary Magdalene, and she better be wearing an engagement ring.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Just like with employment, a company can fire someone, or refuse further employment, for any reason they want. Where they can get in trouble and risk lawsuits is if they declare the reason and that reason is covered by discrimination laws.

I personally think business should have the right to refuse service to anybody, its a private business they should never be forced to do anything they don't want to do. At the same time i think its horrible that in this situation they would use intolerance and bigotry as an excuse to not provide a service. I disagree with their decision, but i do support their right to do so.

Just like with employment, if they would have just refused service and did not state the reason why this would be a non-issue and its would not have blown up in to the headlining controversy it is now. By refusing the service AND stating the reason was due to disagreeing with gay marriage, this business owner has now crossed the line in to discrimination. I don't know the specific laws for this situation, but if they are anything like employment there will be some trouble soon to follow.

DC



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


People think that being offended is a criminal act. It's idiotic. They could have easily moved on to the next after leaving the store owner some choice words. But no, they want the attention and try to make a bigger deal out of it than it really is.

That's what this is. "Someone offended me, feel sorry for me and give me lots of cash!".



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   

MystikMushroom
Another thought...

Not engaging in commerce with someone because the owner's religion tells them homosexuality is wrong is just stupid. Does anyone really think Jesus himself would have a problem? How is selling flowers or a cake to someone who's gay make the owner less of a Christian or whatever faith they are?

Is the owner going to catch something from selling a product to a gay person?

If I sold donuts and some skinheads walked in, I'd sell them donuts (as long as they were polite and non-disruptive). Who they are and what their values are is none of my business. My business is to make money selling a product.

Selling something to someone who I can't stand doesn't make me a worse person -- in fact I would say it makes you a better person, you chose to look beyond your prejudices. Also, it makes you a good capitalist, and we all know how many staunch conservative/pro-capitalist members there are here!


My understanding of at least one of these cases is that the business owner on question knew the customers were gay, had known this for a long time, and had done business with them many times in the past. Where she drew the line was where they were asking her to go and participate in their ceremony. Her conscience was troubled by that. I guess they wanted her to set up the flowers on site or something. And anyhow, she refused at that point and told them why and they sued.

If this is that case and my understanding is correct, where do business owners get to draw the line? Photographers have had this same problem. Should we be required to participate in something that violates our personal morality (whether or not you agree with it) because you feel you have some right to a good or service we provide?

When you start talking about having a right to good or service, you start reducing the providers to slave status. They have no say in whether or not or under what conditions they provide their services to anyone. Is that really where America is going, and all just to satisfy your notions of non-discrimination?



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I can't wait for the day Rand Paul is President
and I can finally enjoy a meal in a "Straight White Christians only"
restaurant.
Freedom !



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Well after reading through all the posts in this thread, it seems that the biggest argument in favor of denying services to people based on race, religious affiliation, and so forth, is focused on the argument that a privately run business should be able to refuse service to a customer who they dislike due to differences in religious values, race, gender, sexual orientation or simply just because they don't like the way they look.

When you are the owner and operator of said business I can understand one feeling that this business is their own personal private possession, no different then the underwear they choose to wear or throwout. But after doing some reading I found that legally such is not the case and a valid explanation as to why the two...the underwear and the business are not viewed, treated, or accepted as equally a private object in which one can do as he wishes.


Does a Restaurant Have the Unrestricted Right to Refuse Service to Specific Patrons? No. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly prohibits restaurants from refusing service to patrons on the basis of race, color, religion, or natural 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 “We Reserve the 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 natural 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.

Source

Businesses that depend on the public demand for their product as a primary means of financial gain and stability for their businesses, rely heavily on serving the public (ie become deeply entangled in their roll as a place of public accommodation else they will miserably fail ) , such as grocery stores, florists, bakers, restauranteurs, night clubs, etc, etc, etc, Their businesses success being so dependent upon ensuring that their customers desires (the public) are effectively accommodated, necessitates the business taking on the mantle of "being a place of public accommodation" and becoming subject to the equal protection laws

Hope that clarifies things a bit



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Pixiefyre
 


This is the story in question.

Note that the man to whom she refused to sell flowers was a longtime customer:


A florist who told her longtime gay customer that she couldn't provide flowers for his wedding is counter-suing the state of Washington — which says her decision was illegal discrimination.


She's suing because she feels she should have freedom of conscience.




'In America, the government is supposed to protect freedom, not use its intolerance for certain viewpoints to intimidate citizens into acting contrary to their faith convictions. Family business owners are constitutionally guaranteed the freedom to live and work according to their beliefs,' said Dale Schowengerdt, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is defending Stutzman.


Freedom of Conscience is not a new concept. It is something that is allowed in medicine specifically to protect health care providers from having to participate in procedures that they would find morally objectionable and would violate their personal faith.

Sadly, a time may be coming when we find the need for such laws in our business life to protect business owners from the same.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join