[arista]

"Anyway, the more I hear this rhetoric, the less I care."

Yes there is so much of it, Maru

ref: CNN HD and FoxNewsHD.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Maru

Imo, if we just keep up with the -phobics, -ist labels... that will lead to the opposite intended result come election time. Those attitudes are already starting to backfire and will lead to those folk who act with indignance to find themselves further isolated...

There are all kinds of worldviews in the world we share with other ppl and we can focus on only just one, and probably inconvenient to have to bother with anyone elses, but I feel like that is living with head in the clouds and only harmful to that person /w a narrow view. Just because we see it our way doesn't mean there aren't other ppl who see another... bigotry to me is being spiteful/venomous towards others when we refuse to accept ppl who outside our own culture. The business owner was following his deeply held religious beliefs... and there is no indication his purpose was malicious here. Just to reiterate, but to try to force our own worldviews will only lead to activists further isolating themselves... will only make them miserable as ppl will eventually move on.

I'm fine w the owner kicking out Sanders. We share the world with other ppl, it is not all about us... to live in a world where we have to only accomodate to one group though is not only an unrealistic way of thinking, but is a one-sided worldview. Anyway, the more I hear this rhetoric, the less I care... eventually just won't bother with it anymore to assist those movements which have become so self-referential. It is just not worth it, pleasing those folk anymore. I believe in treating people with humility and tolerance.. not venomous rhetoric.

I really dislike this thought process. It downplays the struggles of people who aren't the majority by making out that we must appease the majority and that's wrong.

What you are endorsing is appeasement.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I really dislike this thought process. It downplays the struggles of people who aren't the majority by making out that we must appease the majority and that's wrong.

What you are endorsing is appeasement.

Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.

This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...

[Maru]

Well, chicken poop...

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/32391...-james-barrett

Backlash Against The Red Hen For Booting Sarah Sanders Gets Crazy

Backlash against the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia got a little out of control, and a little gross, on Tuesday, culminating in one 51-year-old protester getting arrested after throwing "chicken poop" in the general direction of the Sarah Huckabee Sanders-persecuting restaurant.

The fallout from the decision of the Red Hen's owner to ask Sanders to leave because she works for the Trump administration, and then allegedly helping to stir up a protest against Sanders mostly-liberal family afterward, continues.

The owner, Stephanie Wilkinson, has resigned from her role of director of a local non-profit group designed to promote businesses in the city as a result of the distraction she now presents. "Considering the events of the past weekend, Stephanie felt it best, that for the continued success of Main Street Lexington, she should step aside," the president of the board said.

On Tuesday, Wilkinson's restaurant, which has remained closed since the incident, was visited by a group of protesters who were outraged by the anti-Trumper bigotry. One of those protesters, a West Virginia man, is facing charges after allegedly throwing chicken poop at the restaurant.

WSET reports on the rather raucous group of people, which, along with the feces-flinging West Virginian, included one guy carrying a sign declaring "homos are full of demons":

Tuesday, people turned to the street with their signs in hand to protest the restaurant, which has remained closed since the incident.

Outside the Red Hen people were chanting and held homemade signs, Corey Stewart campaign signs and American and Make America Great Again flags.

Another man held signs that said "Homos are full of demons" and "Unless they repent Let God Burn Them (LGBT) 2 Peter 2:6."

The West Virginian, Reginald Scott Lee, 51, "was arrested and charged with littering and disorderly conduct," NBC4 reports.

Some video of the protest as well as photographic evidence of the gross protest material below:

The firestorm over the Red Hen began when Sanders posted a brief account about her ill-treatment at the hands of Wilkinson:

Sanders handled the ugly situation with class, which Wilkinson later confirmed. The Daily Wire reports:

"I have a business, and I want the business to thrive. This feels like the moment in our democracy when people have to make uncomfortable actions and decisions to uphold their morals," Wilkinson told the Post. Several of her employees, she said, are gay and disagreed with Trump's call for a ban on transgender troops in the military. "Tell me what you want me to do. I can ask her to leave," she says she told her staff. "They said yes."

After telling the press secretary who she was, Wilkinson said she asked for her to come out to the patio, where she "explained that the restaurant has certain standards that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty, and compassion, and cooperation. I said, 'I'd like to ask you to leave.'" Sanders respectfully agreed to leave and offered to pay for the food that was being prepared. "I said, no," Wilkinson said. "It’s on the house

But that was not the full story.

"There’s a part of that story that has not been told," Sanders' father Mike Huckabee told Laura Ingraham over the weekend. "Once Sarah and her family left — of course Sarah was asked to please vacate — Sarah and her husband just went home, they’d had enough. But, the rest of her family went across the street to a different restaurant. The owner of the Red Hen — nobody’s told this — then followed them across the street, called people and organized a protest, yelling and screaming at them from outside the other restaurant and creating this scene.

The incident has set off a series of debates over the increasing degree of incivility of protesters and the personal harassment of political figures, which Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters infamously called for after the targeting of Sanders.

I don't know that I'm willing to take Mike Huckabee's account at face-value. No reason to really disbelieve him I guess, but he's still a politician and it is his daughter, so maybe he is drumming it up...

The whole chicken poop thing is the dumps though. Also nice, some real homemade homophobia...

Outside the Red Hen people were chanting and held homemade signs, Corey Stewart campaign signs and American and Make America Great Again flags.

Another man held signs that said "Homos are full of demons" and "Unless they repent Let God Burn Them (LGBT) 2 Peter 2:6."

I need to remember to invest stock in the Arts & Crafts industry.

[bitontheslide]

Sounds to me like a bunch of unpleasant types spoiling for a fight on both sides

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Maru

Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.

This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...

AWESOME.

[Northern Monkey]

Well like was said with the Irish bakers.They have the right to refuse service to who they like and the market will decide whether they agree by voting with their wallets....

It definitely seems like they are with this place

[Underscore]

Republicans get pissy at the restaurant...

But didn't they lap it up when someone refused service to Joe Biden a few years back?

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Maru

Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.

This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...

Then we should make it clear in constitution or wherever that religion trumps equality and be done with it.
Would you defend if someone had a religion that made him discriminate racially? And refuse to bake cakes for black people? Would you deploy the same arguments how those seeking equality disturb, distress and don't care?
Also, why do you say "there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way of life"?

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Underscore

Republicans get pissy at the restaurant...

But didn't they lap it up when someone refused service to Joe Biden a few years back?

They did
Can't make it up can you.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Underscore

Republicans get pissy at the restaurant...

But didn't they lap it up when someone refused service to Joe Biden a few years back?

I dont know..do you have a list of the pissed of republicans for both events to compare names?

[LeatherTrumpet]

oh they are losing business now due to their petty, vindictive act

oh well

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

oh they are losing business now due to their petty, vindictive act

oh well

What I said about no gay cakes baker

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Maru

Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.

This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...

Youtube video

Why is it the minority that always has to bend their will to make sure the majority remain comfortable? Why couldn't black people just be happy to use different water fountains, and was their challenge to the hierarchy also bigotry disguised as a pursuit for tolerance, in your language?

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

What I said about no gay cakes baker

well i guess upsetting 5 % of the potential customer base is not as bad as 50%

as in this case

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

well i guess upsetting 5 % of the potential customer base is not as bad as 50%

as in this case

Agree, far too many

[bitontheslide]

Just seems like a load of hot headed people on both sides. I mean the woman is saying she is standing up for the rights of her staff, but her actions have at least temporarily closed the restaurant, and as employees get income from tips, that's at least 1 week without any pay, so she is doing them more harm than good.

As for the protesters, there are clearly a few nutters amongst their ranks.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

They did
Can't make it up can you.

I have lost count how many times I have had to say that about ridiculous comments and total hypocrisy from the other side.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Underscore

Republicans get pissy at the restaurant...

But didn't they lap it up when someone refused service to Joe Biden a few years back?

Not exactly the same but the Republican response did involve alot of gloating.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Maru

Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.

This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...

Nah, it's appeasement.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Maru

Well, chicken poop...

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/32391...-james-barrett



I don't know that I'm willing to take Mike Huckabee's account at face-value. No reason to really disbelieve him I guess, but he's still a politician and it is his daughter, so maybe he is drumming it up...

The whole chicken poop thing is the dumps though. Also nice, some real homemade homophobia...



I need to remember to invest stock in the Arts & Crafts industry.

How pleasant these Trump supporters are.....

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Then we should make it clear in constitution or wherever that religion trumps equality and be done with it.
Would you defend if someone had a religion that made him discriminate racially? And refuse to bake cakes for black people? Would you deploy the same arguments how those seeking equality disturb, distress and don't care?
Also, why do you say "there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way of life"?

Religion is protected in the Constitution, that's why they had won the ruling. Escaping religious persecution has always been a huge factor for people immigrating to the States.

Race itself is a protected class so no, that wouldn't be expected to fly. Eventually sexual preference will make itself into there as well. The baker though didn't discriminate against them on the basis of their homosexuality. The disagreement was that their practice (same-sex marriage) came into conflict with his practices, so he couldn't play a part in that ritual. It would be like if someone walked in and wanted food for a cake featuring a celebrating eating and devouring a specific animal and the baker would maybe have to decline because the animal was a spiritual God, etc. The concept of Man+Woman is a sacred union in Christianity and marriage is considered a religious practice, just as sex is considered a sacred practice. That's why we don't really see any orthodox Christians working at adult sex shops. (Editx9000)

Anyway, it would be difficult to find a reasonably-sized religion that discriminates on the basis of race. Just because, how else would that religion thrive if it's narrowing that much it's potential pool of worshipers... It would be a failed experiment at best...

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Maru

Religion is protected in the Constitution, that's why they had won the ruling. Escaping religious persecution has always been a huge factor for people immigrating to the States.

Race itself is a protected class so no, that wouldn't be expected to fly. Eventually sexual preference will make itself into there as well. The baker though didn't discriminate against them on the basis of their homosexuality. The disagreement was that their practice (same-sex marriage) came into conflict with his practices, so he couldn't play a part in that ritual. It would be like if someone walked in and wanted food for a cake featuring a celebrating eating and devouring a specific animal and the baker would maybe have to decline because the animal was a spiritual God, etc. The concept of Man+Woman is a sacred union in Christianity and marriage is considered a religious practice, just as sex is considered a sacred practice. That's why we don't really see any orthodox Christians working at adult sex shops. (Editx9000)

Anyway, it would be difficult to find a reasonably-sized religion that discriminates on the basis of race. Just because, how else would that religion thrive if it's narrowing that much it's potential pool of worshipers... It would be a failed experiment at best...

Race only became a protected class fairly recently, and the same bible you say that sanctifies marriage for Christians is the same one that provided the go-ahead for the Christian slave owners. Don't you find it curious, that there are so many laws and rules in the bible regarding how to live, and yet it's only a couple of the discriminatory beliefs that line up with their own prejudices that they really cry foul at? There's no historical shame in that either; most of modern history has seen homosexuals and different races be treated appallingly by all of our ancestors, regardless of what god they did/didn't believe in. Let's be honest here, Christians defending this issue aren't doing it because Christianity enforces it, they're using Christianity as a shield to protect their own bigotry.

Marriage isn't a commandment, and yet bearing false witness is. Why do American Christians have no problem with lying and protecting liars, but yet are too offended to make a cake?

[Maru]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Race only became a protected class fairly recently, and the same bible you say that sanctifies marriage for Christians is the same one that provided the go-ahead for the Christian slave owners. Don't you find it curious, that there are so many laws and rules in the bible regarding how to live, and yet it's only a couple of the discriminatory beliefs that line up with their own prejudices that they really cry foul at? There's no historical shame in that either; most of modern history has seen homosexuals and different races be treated appallingly by all of our ancestors, regardless of what god they did/didn't believe in. Let's be honest here, Christians defending this issue aren't doing it because Christianity enforces it, they're using Christianity as a shield to protect their own bigotry.

Marriage isn't a commandment, and yet bearing false witness is. Why do American Christians have no problem with lying and protecting liars, but yet are too offended to make a cake?

There we're focusing on the contrast in beliefs, which fall under Freedom of Speech. What I am talking about here is a conflict in practices. i.e. a marriage ceremony

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Maru

There we're focusing on the contrast in beliefs, which fall under Freedom of Speech. What I am talking about here is a conflict in practices. i.e. a marriage ceremony

That doesn't make any sense to me. I've read that sentence 5 times, and I still can't decipher what you mean. Any chance you can elaborate for a dumb plebe like me?