Okay. Recently Sarah Sanders was kicked out of a restaurant after ordering appetizer with her party because they wanted to uphold certain 'morals'

they did at least give her the respect to talk to her privately and politely ask her to leave (no police were called) and they did not accept any payment for the appetizers

but is this what we come to? Can we not make a distinction of 'relevance' in liking what a person stands for and being willing to simply serve them in a public establishment? This place is getting scarier every day with the exclusion and justifications for it.

I don't think that restaurant will have to worry about asking anymore Republicans to leave.

This is true. My gut is those are not the people who are their customers anyway, being there is no details that anyone else in their establishment objected to their actions.

and usually people with this harsh of a judgmentalism of others dont want them around anyway.

but it is sad to see so much of that type of harsh judgmentalism being normalized in so many walks of life.

That certainly isn't anything new.
For as long as I can remember people have been shunned by their communities for their views and their actions.

Just because a business exists doesn't mean they must serve you, sell to you.

Y'know, it works the other way around too.
There are a lot of people that won't patron a business because of that business's views or political stance.

and that is a shame, imho.

oh how true, and that is beauty of free markets , the market determines if you made the right decision.

Personally I think the restaurant has a right to refuse service to Mrs.Huckabee if it violates their policy.

Just like Mrs.Huckabee the classy lady that she is didn't make a stink about it.

Now if people avoid that restaurant because of the owner decision so be it, she could have made a stink and said the restaurant was discriminating against her beliefs as its her 1 st amendment right

So Democrats what is the difference between discriminating against a political party vs discriminating against a person for religious beliefs like not baking a cake for same sex wedding nuptials?

Please explain .

I saw this on the news!
The restaurant looked a bit tatty! Doesn't mean the food is "trash " though

So, the reason for posting is a baker in Ireland was prosecuted for refusing to bake a cake for a "gay" couple saying that they are true Christians and it went against there belief's!
They appealed but I think it still went against them!
So, here it would be against the human rights not to be served and I'd of thought our human rights are the same as yours?
Also, it's discrimination of a belief,race or sexual following lgbgtyxx or whatever the new saying is

Im not all democrats, and I do not believe all democrats share my personal opinion, I am an individual who happens to be a democrat.

and my personal view is that I think there is a difference between denying a person ANY service or goods, and determining which services or goods one will offer ANY persons.

If I own a business I get to say who I serve (do business with).
Its one of the perks of owning your own business.
If I don't want to see to you, provide my services to you, it doesn't matter why.
Go elsewhere because you can't get it from me.

Just because I sell widgets doesn't mean I have to sell widgets right now.
It doesn't mean I have to sell you widgets ever.
I'll sell my widgets to the people I want to sell my widgets to.
I don't care if you go away angry, just go away.

Granted, its not good business practices and you end up losing money (and customers) but if your beliefs are that strong, you may think the loss is acceptable.

In my small hometown I have seen signs in store windows that say
"No Hippies"
This is during the Vietnam Conflict.
The store owners chose not to serve people that did not support our police involvement.
A political stance that set their business model.

I remember hotels (we had an odd amount of hotels in town) that would only allow blacks to rent the top floor rooms. This is before central air conditioning.

Were these practices wrong? Perhaps, but it happened.

When I was in the service (stationed by Virginia Beach) there were bars that only served people in uniform and those with a uniformed escort.
There were also bars that wouldn't serve anyone in any uniform.

The private businesses do not fall under the same policies as the USPS.
The Post Office must deliver all mail no matter the individual preferences of the branch.
Private business is personal.

There are many franchises that have policies set by the franchise owner that allows them freedom of business.
Granted, you might lose your franchise license if you violate the corporation policies but you always have a choice.

Plus, it all works both ways.
If you choose not to buy widgets from a business based on that business's views or stance.
I know people right now that will not hire Mexicans for anything.
The will not use or buy any product from a Mexican owned store.
Its their choice.

still a shame

I understand it for someplace truly 'private' with no public funds involved, but if the public is in any way funding the loan, services, etcetera, I dont think one should be able to exclude ANY of said public from their services.

If its a private business they should have the right to serve who they want to serve and let the market decide if they made the correct decision.

A private business serves his self interest, not the public self interest.

If the business was like lets say transportation which serves the greater good then you can make a case, but a private business doesn't serve the greater good, the business like I said earlier is serving their best interest and pocket book.







Noted Miss harmony, and I wont lump you in with the other Democrats and treat you like an individual.

I will give an example if a private business lets say a hotel, refuses to serve me because Im Black, I say oh well and so what, Im not going to make a stink about or force them to serve me, its a private business they can do what they want.

I will find another hotel that will serve me and they get my money and all I can do is to tell other what they did and if they refuse to stay there then that is the consequence of their policies

If Im boarding a Train that owned or sponsored by the government they cannot enact a policy like that because it violates certain amendments in place.

A private business isnt violating any amendments

Do you see the difference?

Basically what I was saying, a business should not be able to turn away public if they are in any way being supported by taxpayer(public) money

if they are totally privately sustained, they can make the distinction

Business like transportation or lodging which is corporate owned and funded by tax payers money isn't discriminating today or has been for quite the while.

A private business has the right to.

The owner of Red Hen has every right to ask Mrs.Huckabee-Sanders to leave.

here's the best part, I have the right not support the Red Hen, Im not going to protest like what others might have done, I will never step foot in that place, so who loses in the end?

I hope that your friends on the left and other Democrats remember the Red Hen situation when they whine , bi-tch , complain or attempt to protest a baker or florist for refusing to serve a same sex wedding.


So my question is do you support what the Red Hen did to Mrs.Huckabee-Sanders?

I saw that. And the thing with DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen (With a name like that, you just know her family came over on the Mayflower..)

I think it's awesome. Evil people shouldn't be able to lord their power over their minions..

I think they're lucky, Especially Kirstjen Nielsen. With what she's doing to Mexicans, and then going to a Mexican restaurant, I'm sure the guacamole would have been "extra special" and made just for her!

Remember what they did to the food in the movie Fight Club?

No. I do not support anyone refusing service to others for who they are or what they have done or if they like or support them.

Nothing new here. There are establishments that use that platform to spread the personal views of the owners.

There is a luncheonette in Ca. Owned by Muslim extremists that refused to serve cops... then some folks went there and protested.. who did the Muslims extremists call... yep.. the cops.

Don't like them.. till you need them..hypocrites

Who's "we?"
That seems to be kinda the problem, doesn't it?
The idea that everyone, everywhere, without boundaries or distinction is one great big "we."
Then the difficulty is individuals with certain feelings of how "we" should behave getting the "we" to actually behave that way.


I can generally do it, I can't speak for anyone else in the universal "we" you seem to be referring to.
Although I do have a difficult time serving some people without something affecting my demeanor.
I mean some women come in and are all super hot and I'm super friendly and accommodating.
Other times these creepy gay dudes come in and they say borderline inappropriate things, or loaded innuendo, and I want to get them out of there as quickly as possible.
I remember this one couple that came in where I worked and they were pig farmers. They literally left a trail of pig excrement stench throughout the store. I couldn't smile or talk to them really due to having to hold my breath. I really wanted to keep them from coming in. Other customers would complain and ask if we had a sewer line break and why we were still open.


"Being" normalized?
It's been normalized pretty much forever.
Blacks couldn't use white drinking fountains.
No Irish need apply.
Men can't use women's restrooms.
Men's clubs.
Egyptian slave workers can't go to this area of the bazaar.
Foreigners were immediately killed or kicked out with prejudice if they washed up on shore.

The only thing that ever changes are the labels.
People keep doing the same old sht everyday.
Those that lean left or right just disagree on what labels are to be changed and which are to be kept the same.
One side pretends they've made "progress" by doing something, but they're simply discriminating against someone else, protecting a desired class for their own use or emotional/identity well-being.
The only difference are what emotions you personally associate with which labels and how myopic is your perspective.


Many/most cities/states have passed laws where if you want a business license to operate a public business, then you must serve the public, without any kind of discrimination, sometimes even going so far as to being forced to absorb the costs of accommodating some group. e.g. wheelchairs, helper animals, handicapped parking, pregnant parking, automatic doors, electric scooters for the obese depending on floor space, having epipens or defibrillators on hand.

If you want to operate a private, members only club, discriminating for a certain group, you still have to comply with federal eeoe laws, as well as local business laws.

Businesses lost the whole "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" a long time ago.
It just wasn't in the news in a spectacular fashion, happening by executive order, a sign of the pen.


They still have to comply with local business laws.

Were you aware that if you enter a business you are legally liable to uphold/adhere to the company's anti harrassment/discrimination policies, whatever they may be? Do you read the company's policies before entering? Do you even know where to find them?

There are a lot of laws on the books that have pretty much eroded any rights around "private" property and/or individual rights in commerce.
For the most part, they aren't all that enforced, and if they are it just isn't all that "newsworthy" like some anti/pro trump restaurant bs.


IMO this was more likely an attempt to avoid potentially making a scene in the public dining room. IMO the manager/owner was just trying to "cya," it wasn't out of any real respect or politeness.

If they had started shooting at them, who would have been called?

It would have been... Oh never mind..

The more I think about it, I think Sanders, Miller, and their ilk should be served with great big smiles.

That would be the best way for people to express their dissatisfaction...

By being "creative" with their menu selections.

The kings of old, had people that would taste their food, in case of poison.

They don't.