Conservative Kicked Out of Florida Restaurant

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: ketsuko

I want to hear the restaurant owner's side of this.

Why am I not surprised...

originally posted by: ancientlight
a reply to: mysterioustranger
Refusing to bake a cake is different from being kicked out of a resteraunt.

They weren't refusing to bake them a cake.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: DBCowboy
[quote[Free speech is not free speech when others view it as hate speech.

Said the petty-tyrant-wanna-be.

a reply to: Boadicea

Except we have established that business owners do not. For leftists especially businesses should all be just about the money ... until suddenly we have an issue like this one.

It's time to decide - do business owners get to decide or not? If they do, then they ALL do, even when you don't agree, but some can't decide, then NONE can, not even when you think they should be able to.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: ketsuko

Freedom of speech can be maintained for the activist but then freedoms of others comes into play, that being the 'where' if they take offense then their freedoms/rights are trampled on.

Not even remotely close. Your 'feelz' fon't have any rights.

a reply to: nickyw

Caldwell is the black guy who moved into the wrong neighborhood back in the day, and the locals were being "neighborly".

Wonder if any Nigerian brothers are on Paradis's payroll?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: dandandat2
when your freedom of speech is actually disguised hate speec

According to WHO?

Anyone can declare anything they want as 'hate speech'. Does that automatically make it so?

Another irony here is that this might only still be operational *because* it's in a highly unsafe red state like Florida that let it remain open through COVID.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: ketsuko
That restaurant is considered a 'safe space' so in their minds and intentions, yes, that is the 'where' freedom from offense can be had. I'm now wondering if conservative guy's friends took him there on purpose knowing how he behaves in public.

How he behaves in public? You appear to be assuming that he behaves badly in public, and/or that he did so in this case. On what do you base this opinion?

If they want their restaurant to be an actual 'safe space', then convert it to a private club.

Otherwise, if they are open to the general public, they CANNOT discriminate against someone for simply expressing views in casual conversation. If he was yelling/screaming or anything like that, that would be different, but there has been nothing to indicate that was the case.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

Except we have established that business owners do not.

I don't think that's been established at all. In fact, here's one example of partisan intolerance on the right showing that it's not just the left:

Florida restaurant owner tells Biden supporters to ‘take your business elsewhere’

And it seems to be quite popular with lots of customers:

The owner of a diner that denied entry to Biden voters said it became so popular they ran out of food

For leftists especially businesses should all be just about the money ... until suddenly we have an issue like this one.

Well, that's not my experience... leftists have long demanded that corporations have a social conscience and conduct their business accordingly. But I don't see any room for us telling leftists what they "should" be all about. Even better, individuals will decide for themselves what they "should" be about, based on their own perceptions and experiences -- whether it conforms to the party line or not!

It's time to decide - do business owners get to decide or not? If they do, then they ALL do, even when you don't agree, but some can't decide, then NONE can, not even when you think they should be able to.

Yup. One law for all people with equal application of the law and due process of the law. Party politics and political ideology don't even enter into it. Unless one is more concerned with making cheap political points, antagonizing the "enemy," and furthering the divide-and-conquer campaign, than justice for all.

a reply to: Boadicea

I was talking about LGBT + BBQ issues.

Those are legally forced all the time. But this is allowed? It does not matter. Discrimination is Discrimination. One type is not more or less damaging than any other.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask
The same result though, no cake for you - no soup for you.

Yeah... no. The baker was more than happy to sell them a cake.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: ketsuko
The first amendment says that Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech. It says nothing at all about the owner of a private establishment kicking someone out for exercising their freedom of speech.

Correct. It is the civil rights laws that cover this for businesses that are open to the general public.

Incidentally, I'm AGAINST these kinds of laws, I believe that businesses should be able to serve whoever they please, and refuse to serve whoever they displease, for any reason - and yes, if a restaurant owner wanted to refuse to serve certain people based on skin color, I believe they should have that Right.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

I was talking about LGBT + BBQ issues.

Those are legally forced all the time. But this is allowed? It does not matter.

Exactly! It doesn't matter!!! Because --

Discrimination is Discrimination. One type is not more or less damaging than any other.

Whether it's the restaurant owner who refuses to host a MAGA rally or a baker that refuses to bake a cake or any business owner for any reason... everyone has the right to association, and therefore non-association, and therefore the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

No left/right, Dem/Pub, liberal/conservative. No labels necessary or appropriate except "We the People."

We protect everyone's rights to protect our own rights, because it may be them now, but if you create the standard, you can be sure it will be you sooner or later.

a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not sure what point you are after.

My point is that if you protect one class, you protect them all, not just the ones you find it politically palatable to protect.

Also, my point is that discrimination is discrimination. It does not matter one bit to the person discriminated against why it happened. Either you allow it to happen because you believe that the business owner has the right to decide with whom they will do business and how - and this includes baking custom cakes or having people who talk in ways you don't like - or you have no power to decide on this score, and it doesn't matter what we're talking about.

It should not matter at all to you whether we are talking about conservatives having "uncomfortable speech" or gays wanting custom cakes. If you are not allowed freedom of association with one, then you are not with the other and vice versa.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not sure what point you are after.

My point is that if you protect one class, you protect them all, not just the ones you find it politically palatable to protect.

Also, my point is that discrimination is discrimination. It does not matter one bit to the person discriminated against why it happened. Either you allow it to happen because you believe that the business owner has the right to decide with whom they will do business and how - and this includes baking custom cakes or having people who talk in ways you don't like - or you have no power to decide on this score, and it doesn't matter what we're talking about.

It should not matter at all to you whether we are talking about conservatives having "uncomfortable speech" or gays wanting custom cakes. If you are not allowed freedom of association with, then you are not with the other and vice versa.

My point is exactly the point that you just made without using any reference to party or partisan politics. Well, except once at the end. But initially you made exactly the right point without bringing either party or ideology into the equation.

As long as party politics is the issue, then it's all about party and partisan echo chambers.

Leave party politics out of it, and it's all about rights and principles equally applied for/to all, equally protecting all.

a reply to: ketsuko

What else can we expect of the authoritarian leftists? They are all "communists".

a reply to: ketsuko

It would be so ironic if the structure burned to the ground and the words "mostly peaceful fire" were spray painted on the sidewalk in front and walls with a BLM tag.

What a terrible establishment I would never visit.