Texas Restaurant Bans Gay Couple Because ‘We Do Not Like Fags’

a reply to: Sremmos80

And you seem to think that means they must tolerate a behavior they wouldn't tolerate from anyone else.


Why should they have to treat them special?

a reply to: Grimpachi

Cause I refuse to believe he kicks out men and women for rubbing legs.
If the PDA( Public display of affection) was so outrageous then why not release the video of it?
The couple denies the claims that it was inappropriate.

a reply to: Sremmos80

I just answered your question as to why one wouldn't release the footage. Why did you ignore that?

I find it funny that religious people accuse gay people of wanting to be "special" when they ask to not be discriminated against.

What they don't realize in their stupidity is that they themselves are "special" since the discrimination laws pertain to them too......i.e. being religious.

Stupid is as stupid does I guess.

a reply to: HandyDandy

Oh my.

I certainly hope that comment wasn't directed at me.


That would be funny.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: HandyDandy

Oh my.

I certainly hope that comment wasn't directed at me.


That would be funny.

The world doesn't revolve around you dear.

Care to counter my statement?

Or do you agree with me that Christians are already "special"?

a reply to: HandyDandy

Never claimed it did. I just found it interesting you would say such a thing only two posts after I asked why they should be treated special.

Must be a coincidence.

a reply to: Grimpachi

I didn't ignore it, I didn't see it.
And you didn't answer it, you provided your speculation on it.
Big earl said he wasn't going to release it in the article, not that he didn't have the ability to.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Funny thing is....I was typing that when you posted it.

Care to address the statement that Christians are already "special"?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Heretic, I sit corrected. I understood that the "Public Accommodations" section of the Civil Rights Act DID protect against unfair discrimination on ANY basis in terms inns, restaurants, etc., i.e. public accommodations, but in fact, I was incorrect and you are correct.

Sadly in some States, ALL people really only means SOME of the people. Yet, obviously, there's no discrimination any more against LGBT folks anywhere in this country ... so why do we have to "hear about it all the time" and have it "shoved down our throats"?

I mean, who doesn't enjoy being called "a fag" to your face, right?

What i think is hilarious is that a group of activists have created a five-star rating for "Earl's Bait Shop" as "gay friendly."

Gotta love the free market.

This is the new way for a restaurant to get nationwide news coverage and free advertisement worth $Millions. And all the news outlets and internet posters take the bait. The method is old. Just say or do something outrageous and all the plebs will carpet-bomb the media with their outrage and in the process deliver you more public attention than any costly marketing campaign ever could. The correct response to this would be no response at all, whereby the restaurant falls back into small town oblivion, but I guess people just can't help themselves.

a reply to: EnduranceArtist

Well the ole saying in sales where I come from is 1 bad review gets spread to 10 people where as 1 good review will only reach 5...
But I do see your all publicity is good publicity point you are making

a reply to: Sremmos80

So legal reasons as to why a person wouldn't simply throw a video up for the world to see isn't good enough for you.

You know some people have better things to do "like run a business" than to screw around on a video all day blurring faces.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Yet, obviously, there's no discrimination anymore against LGBT folks in this country, so why do we have to "hear about it all the time" and have it "shoved down our throats"? I mean, who doesn't enjoy being called "a fag" to your face, right?

Exactly! Why don't they just go to another restaurant/store/gas station/hair stylist who won't call them a fag?

What i think is hilarious is that a group of activists have created a five-star rating for "Earl's Bait Shop" as "gay friendly."

Gotta love the free market.

Yeah, I've been reading about it. Hilarious! LOL

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Sremmos80

I just answered your question as to why one wouldn't release the footage. Why did you ignore that?

Whoever they released it to would handle all the requirements for them. It wouldn't cost them anything for editing since the media outfit which got it would certainly handle all that for the exclusive.

With that said, "Is it worth it?" I'd say yes. If it would solve the issue of proving what the truth really was and what happened. My guess is that what would show on the tape, if anything at all, would be absolutely nothing that would help Big Carl's claims however which is why it's not going to happen.

originally posted by: HandyDandy
a reply to: Grimpachi


Care to address the statement that Christians are already "special"?

Nope I don't believe in deities and I rail against the Christian right. Otherwise I don't give a damn when they keep it to themselves.

a reply to: Grimpachi

You are ASSUMING legal reasons is preventing him form releasing it.
Do you know the texas law about when you give up your right not to be filmed?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Well, perhaps they will make that choice NOW, but, before Big Earl's daughter let them know, I don't think they really thought anything about it. I mean, I would certainly realize that the "men acting as men" stuff is code for "stay away gays" but maybe they didn't, maybe they didn't read it, maybe they chose to ignore it.

I don't give my money to folks that treat me badly.

However, I do agree that these episodes need to be publicized for what they are. Let the public vote with its wallet.

And beyond that, the concept of public accommodation is quite clear, at least, in spirit.

a reply to: Grimpachi

So back to your "special" comment then.

How is that gay people wanting the same is "special" when everyone else is already "special"?

Or is it that Christians just don't want gay people to be "special" like them?

a reply to: mOjOm

How do you know they can legally just hand the video over to a news organization?

Are you just assuming they would be cleared of all legal liability if the News didn't blur the faces for them or do you have experience with such things.

I understand everyone here has their opinion of which side is telling the truth"the whole truth" but that is all we have is opinion.

Maybe he doesn't need to prove to the world I believe I read he has gotten a lot of support from the locals there. It doesn't seem to be hurting his business.