Christian conservative group denied service at Virginia restaurant as staff felt 'unsafe'

As a business owner, I think you should get to pick and choose based on ideology, then you also reap the reward of such action as well.

The last thing I want to do is force a food establishment who does not want my business to be required to serve me.
I agree.
 
No we want consistency in the enforcement of these rules. The scenario you cite often brings societal condemnation on the photographer and even if they prevail in court they are often dragged through our legal system as if they did something wrong.

I would prefer that a person or business has the right to refuse service for any reason they choose. Since we don't have that then service must be provided accept for very rare circumstances.
Blah, blah, blah...

What is the principle, the standard...rules that apply to all? That can be understood by all?

Should you be able to deny a gay couple your photography services?
Should you be permitted to deny renting your house to a mixed race couple?
Can you set up a covenant for all home owners in your gated community that they can't sell to Jews?
Should you be able to refuse to serve a Muslim (in obvious religious clothing regalia) at your restaurant?
 
No we want consistency in the enforcement of these rules. The scenario you cite often brings societal condemnation on the photographer and even if they prevail in court they are often dragged through our legal system as if they did something wrong.

I would prefer that a person or business has the right to refuse service for any reason they choose. Since we don't have that then service must be provided accept for very rare circumstances.
Let the market decide how to react to that person/entity.

The overwhelming majority would find it self defeating to limit their potential customer base.
 
Of course the restaurant has the right to refuse service to whomever they want.

Customers also have the right to boycott.
I agree but this is not consistently practiced by the law, MSM and in many Blue Regions of the country.
 
I agree and would rather have them cancel my reservation then spit in my food. But the bigger issue is why can the left cite their ideological concerns as a rational to deny service while religious justifications are dismissed. We either have one set of rules or no rules. I would have no problem with a business choosing to deny service based on any reason they want. Just make sure it cuts both ways.
I think they may need to make the service about the physical place, and about customization. If a person can take a regular retail products from vendor door to their door, and they order a product that is offered to anyone that walks in the place, don’t deny them. If they want you to go set up some extravagant cake at a gay wedding, or attend and photograph one, that should be at the discretion of the vendor.

But all of this is fake. These are loony activists that just want to find any way they can to harm a person that disagrees with their deviant life style. They are grooming the controlled opposition.
 
Last edited:
A Black and Liberal nonprofit organization based in Richmond, Virginia , was rejected service at a restaurant due to its political beliefs.

The Black Foundation had scheduled an event at the Metzger Bar and Butchery on Wednesday but had its reservation canceled by the restaurant less than two hours before the scheduled time. The organization found out that its reservation had been canceled after a restaurant employee looked up the organization, and the restaurant's waitstaff refused to serve it, according to the Black Foundation.

Seems reasonable? Maybe in 1960.
 
I think they may need to make the service about the physical place, and about customization. If a person can take a regular retail products from vendor door to their door, and they order a product that is offered to anyone that walks in the place, don’t deny them. If they want you to go set up some extravagant cake at a gay wedding, or attend and photograph one, that should be at the discretion of the vendor.

But all of this is fake. These are loony activists that just want to find any way they can to harm a person that disagrees with their deviant life style
I would say in at least some of these occasions the viewpoint of the proprietor is known and activists push the issue rather than the live and let live ethos they claim to support.
 
Blah, blah, blah...

What is the principal, the standard...rules that apply to all? That can be understood by all?

Should you be able to deny a gay couple your photography services? Yes
Should you be permitted to deny renting your house to a mixed race couple? Yes
Can you set up a covenant for all home owners in your gated community that they can't sell to Jews? No
Should you be able to refuse to serve a Muslim (in obvious religious clothing regalia) at your restaurant? Yes
First off, my biggest objection to this is the obvious inconsistency in the enforcement of the rules. It is clear that there is an ideological filter that is applied which drives how the law and society react to each situation. So as long as it is an INDIVIDUAL decision I would say YES to your questions. The HOA scenario is not an individual but rather a group decision so I said no to your scenario.

Of course someone who refuses services based on the reasons you supplied would be at a severe economic disadvantage. Over time the market would sort most them out. Is this an deal situation? No it isn't. But it's much better then selectively enforcing the rules.
 
A Black and Liberal nonprofit organization based in Richmond, Virginia , was rejected service at a restaurant due to its political beliefs.

The Black Foundation had scheduled an event at the Metzger Bar and Butchery on Wednesday but had its reservation canceled by the restaurant less than two hours before the scheduled time. The organization found out that its reservation had been canceled after a restaurant employee looked up the organization, and the restaurant's waitstaff refused to serve it, according to the Black Foundation.

Seems reasonable? Maybe in 1960.
My interest in this scenario is the starkly different reaction by the government and MSM if this is what happened today. It's this inconsistency in response that has me favoring the position that any business or individual has the right to refuse it's services to anyone for any reason it chooses.

In a better world common sense and decency would rule here. But the left has weaponized these situations to push their agenda. The only way to push back is to either force a consistent reaction to these events or free up individuals and business to decide for their own reasons who they can serve or not serve.
 
In fact they've been condemned by Christians. And they hate Papists i.e. Catholics about as much as they hate anyone else.
Maybe it was a stretch for me to call the KKK a "Christian" organization but not much of one.






 
Maybe it was a stretch for me to call the KKK a "Christian" organization but not much of one.






do you consider yourself a bigot?
 
Maybe it was a stretch for me to call the KKK a "Christian" organization but not much of one.






Yes, it is important for non Christians such as those that inhabit the main media to demonize mainstream Christians. Attempting to connect them to the KKK, is merely a precursor to bringing Hitler into the conversation. Congrats on this.
 
Yes, it is important for non Christians such as those that inhabit the main media to demonize mainstream Christians. Attempting to connect them to the KKK, is merely a precursor to bringing Hitler into the conversation. Congrats on this.
This is what they do. They demand the absolute right to label their ideological opposition in any way they choose. So if they say the KKK is a "Christian organization" who are we to dispute it? It doesn't matter that the teachings and actions of the KKK go against the basic beliefs of Christianity.

The arrogance of their thinking is astounding.

The real crime is that we on the right let them do this to us. We cower in fear that they might call us racists or bigots or homophobes or transphobes or horror of horrors- NAZIS! We grovel and deny and try to defend ourselves against their ridiculous charges. But no more. We need to ignore these fools and not give them the power to label us.
 
This is what they do. They demand the absolute right to label their ideological opposition in any way they choose. So if they say the KKK is a "Christian organization" who are we to dispute it? It doesn't matter that the teachings and actions of the KKK go against the basic beliefs of Christianity.

The arrogance of their thinking is astounding.

The real crime is that we on the right let them do this to us. We cower in fear that they might call us racists or bigots or homophobes or transphobes or horror of horrors- NAZIS! We grovel and deny and try to defend ourselves against their ridiculous charges. But no more. We need to ignore these fools and not give them the power to label us.
I realize that different folks use and distort religions all kinds of ways. I was not attacking Christianity. I was just showing that just throwing the name or title Christian on something doesn't necessarily make it a good organization. People all over this world have distorted Christianity and Islam to propel their own goals whatever they may be.
 
Top