Posted on 02/26/2014 6:47:48 AM PST by Kazan
bwaaaaaaaaaaaa,who cares..I would not be caught in a gay bar or to any bar gay or other wise..I would be afraid of catching something if I visited such a place as a so called gay bar..
Clever bar. Free promotion, complements of CBS.
EXACTLY!It’s”Their Way Or The Highway”!!If you go along with them,you are said to be TOLERANT???????????
Not very “tolerant” of them is it?
How is it that a business owner has the constitutional right to refuse service to someone who has a right to carry a firearm...yet no one says anything. If the govt steeped in an ordered them to serve them...there would be a huge backlash...i don’t see the difference here
Cavuto got into this a-bit yesterday.
Because gays as protected minorities are defined by their feelings, gay protection laws protect their actions/behavior.
Example : No laws refuse to marry gays to gays as long as they are the opposite sex, or even to marry gays to heterosexuals. That is why this is not the same as black-white marriage discrimination.
So its OK to discriminate against those who support these religious liberty bills, but not to discriminate against those who support a gay lifestyle?
The second is protected by the 14th amendment but the first is not?
That is a how this fight should HAVE been approached to have any chance to win it.
I prefer Whataburger anyway. I have successfully stayed out of Kalifornia since 1984.
The bar owner doesn’t agree that businesses should be able to deny service and promotes this by denying service?
hypocrisy much?
Intolerant tolerance.
I have added The Abbey Food & Bar located at 692 North Robertson Blvd. to my “Deny Patronage” list.
If I can find a picture of David Cooley, I’ll start a remembrance wall (to remind me not to eat there).
What right does Mr. Cooley have to state that religious tenets constitute “discrimination?”
God is not mocked, Mr. Cooley.
How does ones behavior make one a “minority”?
Not serving people I disagree with is OK for me but not for thee.
Great question
simple , using Public opinion : By winning the PR battle by using better SOUNDING arguments.
GOPs and even so-cons have been depending on not very good arguments like ‘we believe’, which has recently morphed into ‘religious freedom’
while libs have been making a case that gays are born different through no choice of their own and their orientation is identical to race.
I never see a Republican or a so-con on TV taking that argument apart.
Go with a dozen friends of both sexes, and make sure you have your lawyer with you. You just may wind up as the owner of a gay bar. What you do with it afterwards is your business.
It may be illegal for gay bars to refuse service to Christians, but it shouldn’t be. Constitutional protections override any state or federal laws, and civil rights laws have created only more legal chaos and litigation.
Government no longer has an overriding compelling interest to force business to serve people they don’t want to serve. Freedom of association is protected by the constitution. I should not give up that right simply because I operate a business.
There are probably plenty of other gay bars available for Christians should they choose not to go to this particular one. No one’s fundamental freedoms are harmed by the gay bar’s actions, just like a homosexual couple hasn’t lost their freedom when a bakery won’t make a wedding cake for them. The constitution only protects citizens from discrimination by government, not privately owned businesses. It doesn’t give you a right to force someone else to serve you (unless that person represents the government of course).
Can you imagine the litigation that would go away if the SCOTUS spoke clearly on the constitutionally protected freedoms of association and religion as well as private property rights? As a society, we keep having to go back to the courts over and over again, because they’ve muddied the waters over something that should be nearly black and white.
I understand the civil rights era tossed out all sorts of constitutionally protected rights, because some white businesses were refusing to do business with blacks. Maybe in the day one could not buy groceries if one was black, because there was only one store and it refused to serve blacks. That’s probably not true today, because there are plenty of businesses that will serve anyone who enters the door.
That’s the bottom line here. If a private business wants to lose money by refusing to serve certain people, that should be their choice, and that is EXACTLY what will happen if some business starts turning away blacks or gays or Christians. It’s a stupid way to do business, so it will be self correcting over time (those businesses will likely cease to exist).
Again, none of this makes it OK for government to show ANY preference for anyone (like they do today...an absolute travesty) or discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or religion. Government is absolutely prevented by the constitution from treating people differently based on those constitutionally protected categories, gay being NOT one of them.
> “The Abbey, which features a rainbow-colored cross as its logo”
>
> Blasphemy which won’t be amusing at the End. Just sayin’
What blasphemy? The rainbow is the symbol of the covenant between God and all living things on Earth.
— Or are you going to assert that a small group of people is greater than God (and can therefore wholly re-purpose the symbol).
Too bad, courts already ruled you can’t discriminate. Serve one, serve all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.