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.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Xtrozero
Just like the clothing you wear and the behaviors we feel like doing... meet the establishment's standards and all is good.
The gay couple was welcomed but their behavior was not...so it seems, otherwise they would not have made it past the front door much less eat.
So according to the door sign at this establishment, a Lipstick lesbian would be welcomed, but a Butch lesbian would not.
Behavior issues aside.
I said the owner stated clearly t hat the two were behaving inappropriately in his establishment, so they were told to leave.
If I went in with my husband, and we were in each others laps, or groping, or whatever, I have no doubt we'd be asked to leave as well. We wouldn't have to go get fresh with someone else for our actions to be wrong. This couple heard about this place, and decided to make a scene, and raise a stink. That's clear.
The reason they were removed was stated.
the intolerant anti-Christian folks that think Christians don't have a right to their beliefs.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xtrozero
/sigh
Yes, there are meanings of the word "discriminate" which include the simple choices we make everyday.
"Am I having the coffee or the tea with breakfast? The tea? Fine." (Coffee was discriminated against; poor coffee.)
In this case, we are of course not discussing the simple choice of one thing or quality over another, but of human beings and American citizens being called hateful names and told they shouldn't come back to a restaurant because of their innate characteristics.
There's a difference between the two meanings of the word, yes?
Now that we've cleared that up, there's no question that in Texas at this time, people CAN BE discriminated against based on sexual orientation because, hey, it's only 2014 and obviously we don't have to do what's right (treat everyone fairly regardless of the law) unless we're made to do so. (This, by the by, is the inherent flaw in a libertarian paradise, but I digress).
You've introduced a string of hypotheticals that I have no opinion on without more details. I personally dont' think guns in restaurants are a good idea, and I'm not sure what you're implying by taking my comment about "loud" people out of context.
SHOULD the folks in Texas act this way and treat paying customers like this? Of course not. It's bad for business, in the long run, because there is no doubt that social and cultural trends are in favor of inclusion and equal treatment.
Equal treatment of American citizens before the law is not an "opinion." The unpleasant characteristics you toss into your examples like stacks of red herring really mean nothing to me. I can conceive of equally obnoxious situations with examples that you'd probably find completely acceptable. That's generally called "stacking the deck."
Anyone who does not see that this facility (Big Earls) feels like it's well within its rights to discriminate against gays and lesbians (the "men as men and women as women" bit on the front door) is simply and willfully trying not to see it. Its as obvious as Big Earl's Daughter dropping another "f bomb" without even batting an eye, likely.
Beyond that, I'm not sure why you would "jump around screaming gay discrimination" ... are you gay? If not, you probably don't have any skin in the game.
“my goal is to always come from a place of love ...but sometimes you just have to break it down for a mother..." - RuPaul
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
No, I don't just believe them. I look at what both sides have said, find the common details from both sides which can be assumed to be correct since both sides are the same.
originally posted by: mOjOm
I never said they did nothing. What I said is that what they did, which isn't completely clear, still doesn't seem to be anything that normally would be considered obscene. Unless of course you happen to be a very anti-gay personality type who is motivated to find something wrong, which is exactly what I think this waitress is.
originally posted by: mOjOm
I make that assumption of some logical assumptions as well. Since we have few details that's all we can do. Sitting across the table how far can one person reach under toward the other??? Even with their chin on the table and reaching under they'll most likely get to touch a knee, or if the other person is also reaching they could hold hands. There is no way you can reach the crotch of the other person. So the most probable thing is that "Rubbing Legs" at best means one has his legs up in the others lap and he's massaging his legs. If that is too gay for anyone to witness then I'd say you're looking for something to bitch about. Doesn't matter if it's two dudes or whatever, there is nothing obscene about it.
originally posted by: mOjOm
That is just one of the details that can be assumed with a fair amount of accuracy. There are more, but this would get too long for me to list them all. I just want you to understand how I'm viewing this so you understand that I'm not just taking one side over the other. I don't give a crap about sides. I don't even care if this is actually a real event. It doesn't effect me in any way. I look at it almost like an intellectual exercise since even if it was fictional or not doesn't matter. Basically it's just a process of taking in what details you have then processing them and trying to extrapolate more information logically to see how close you can get to actually figuring out the truth. That's it.
So you think that daily discrimination is limited to inanimate objects otherwise it is all wrong?
originally posted by: Gryphon66
"A (unfairly) discriminated against B."
originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
Stuff like scratching your balls, burp out loud, maybe rip a fart and laugh about it. Make sure to address the waitress as , "Pretty little thang" and invite her to "take a seat over here on daddies lap."
Wear some dirty jeans and cowboy boots that are all dusty and the biggest belt buckle you can find with an eagle on it.
You know stuff like that.
originally posted by: Xtrozero
I wonder how they would even know they were gay in the first place unless there was behavior that identified them as such, behavior that upset the establishment in some way, but it sure seems there was some kind of altercation in any event.
originally posted by: took red pill
They WOULDN'T have known!
That's the problem. Most people here are willing to live & let live, but don't like having "alternate lifestyles" shoved down our throats.
If they didn't want to start trouble they should have kept bedroom activities out of the restaurant.
After the story broke on local news outlets, people began writing reviews for Big Earl's claiming the Texas restaurant is actually a gay bar. Its Yelp page has been flooded with photos of same-sex couples and an image of the store's billboard has been manipulated to read "Big Gay Al's."
One Yelp review reads: "Lovely place to bring your same-sex partner to and show how much you love him/her as much as their food! The more flamboyant, the better!"
Another says: "On the positive side, it says "Bait House" but the place was more like a Bath House with all the horny Texas cowboys flirting and slapping each other's behinds. Very gay-friendly atmosphere!"