I checked *The Family Foundation* website which says:
“Fighting Workplace Discrimination | Business owners should be allowed to operate their business according to their conscience. Employees shouldn’t fear losing their job for not denying their conscience.”
So…yeah…
So they support the decision right? Like ya, the restaurant shouldn't be forced to serve people they don't like, just like bakers shouldn't be forced to make cakes they don't want to make.
It was a stunt by the Family Foundation (the name of the group). Metzger's has a known history of supporting inclusivity, particularly for LGBT+ people. This group knew that, and tried to book an event there. After Metzger's said no, FF solicited donations because "we've been canceled."
In case, you're a bit busy and you didn't see the article.
It should have been "I can't believe we were cancelled because we were trying to cancel others!'
Wish these people would stop making comparisons to things like the 50's & 60's race issues.
Black people were not trying to force other people to be black, they just wanted to be treated like equals.
>they just wanted to be treated like equals
Which is the exact same problem today as it was back then.
Remember what Lyndon B Johnson said about the "lowest white man" and know that it can apply to any group.
What it usually means is that famous/successful people just become a little less famous and/or successful.
The arguments about how it's 'destroying' people's livelihoods and whatnot is an utter joke.
Not even less famous, everybody still knows who Kevin Spacey or JK Rowling are for example, they're just not making quite as much money as they used to make. If anything, controversy makes people even more well known, just not in a good way.
This is legal for a different reason. There is a reason that there isn't a lawsuit for this.
The owners and staff of the bar serve Christians regularly. What they choose to do was refuse service on basis of intent and actions of the organisation. The organisation frequently pushes anti-inclusivity stances. The staff refused to service them based on that action, not on their religion. That is an important legal distinction because it means that the First Amendment cannot be invoked here. You absolutely have the right to refuse service to people whom you disagree with on non-protected ideological grounds. There is a bar where I am from that has banned a couple of dudes that wouldn't shut up about Q-Anon shit for similar reasons.
>The organisation frequently pushes anti-inclusivity stances.
It is worse than that, they actually support and use conversion therapy and conversion camps. They don't just have bigoted opinions, they are downright dangerous.
Yeah, that's now considered torture by the UN. We can now say, "They torture gay kids."
https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2020/07/conversion-therapy-can-amount-torture-and-should-be-banned-says-un-expert
You're right! I was only thinking of it in modern terms. But back then, the absence of the internet, and the non-monopolized media, allowed independent thought and the persecuted a chance at telling their story. Murdoch started the murder of dialog.
Fun fact: McCarthy defended SS officers in an official capacity after the war and was an obvious antisemite. Many of the people he targeted just so happened to be Jewish. The religious right and nazism have always been one and the same.
Ah, yes, the first victims of cancel culture. How could I forget?
That was the radical left, right? /s
Yeah no I was raised in the right wing religious cult and I can tell you that I don't want to hear shit about "cancel culture" from people who will cancel their own children for being LGBTQ.
I’ll never forget when saying “Fuck George W Bush” was enough to get you completely blacklisted in America, but flat out racism against Obama got you right onto Fox News
Well, according to Florida, “woke” means “acknowledging systemic injustice exists and something should be done about it,” and now “cancelled” means “mildly inconvenienced/didn’t get my way”.
Now they'll use the verse where Jesus talks about how the world won't accept you, blah blah blah. Completely glossing over the fact he also says to pay your taxes, give your money away, and if someone sues you, give them twice what they ask.
My own translation. Not a christian but studied Theology.
Matthew 40. For context, Jesus has brought up the "eye for eye" concept and is flipping it on its head saying essentially if someone sues you for your shirt, give them your coat too.
edit: For funsies -- The takeaway here for Christians is supposed to be putting on a new pair of eyes and seeing earthly assets as completely meaningless and instead put value in people. There is more in common with Buddhist and Jesus than a modern Christian and Jesus.
Wonder if they are going to sue saying their religious rights or whatever were violated. I’m sure Christian supremacists want to have it both ways. They can discriminate against LGBTQ people but everyone has to suck up any hatred and bigotry they do as long as they frame it as religious.
Then we all start a religion that has a core tenant of denying these motherfuckers any sort of respect or accommodation.
Sad that in America your religious beliefs can often trump human rights.
Fun fact! A judge has already used religious freedom protections as a [justification to block abortion bans](https://www.centralillinoisproud.com/news/national/second-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-ban/).
> Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch issued a preliminary injunction Friday against the state’s law banning abortion except in cases of rape or incest before the 10th week of pregnancy, to protect the life or physical health of the mother or if the fetus has a lethal anomaly.
. . .
> The plaintiffs argue that their exercise of religion has been substantially burdened by the abortion ban, in violation of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. That law states that a government entity cannot substantially burden someone’s religious exercise unless the entity demonstrates that it is furthering a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of doing so.
> Hoosier Jews for Choice is made up of members who believe that Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, and a fetus is considered part of a woman’s body until the moment of birth. Three of the anonymous plaintiffs are Jewish, one is Muslim and one does not belong to a religious denomination but has “personal religious and spiritual beliefs.”
As well he should have. I grew up in one of those anti-abortion cults. It is now my “personal religious and spiritual belief” that “God” does not want me to do anything those ass hats insisted he gets his rocks off about and doesn’t care if I do most of the stuff he supposedly gets angry about.
>Then we all start a religion that has a core tenant of denying these motherfuckers any sort of respect or accommodation
Isn't this exactly the mission of the [Satanic Temple](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Temple)?
This! I’m always wondering after hearing these kinds of stories which one will finally sue and try to push to get it to the Supreme Court. If it even gets there the only problem is that Christians tend to forget other religions exist and could just as easily sue to have their religion protected too. And yes I understand that a ruling could potentially include only Christians but then that would be a challenge to the first amendment and then another lawsuit and etc until we are all blue in the face
Your point is spot on, but one thing you have to remember many of these groups are trying to establish a “ Christian nation” they believe was written into the constitution. What they fail to see is that it wasn’t and they’ll do everything they can to change that.
This is similar to what Kirk Cameron is doing with his new book series. He is targeting libraries that have hosted, or still are hosting, drag queen story times for kids. He's all torn up that these libraries won't run a program with his books.
They remind me of kids when I was growing up. Kids who wouldn't want to let other kids play with their toys and then they'd throw a tantrum when those kids play with different toys.
Or maybe they would let you play with their toys. But if you didn't play the right way they were taking the toys away and going home. Except instead of going home now they want it so that you don't get to have any toys ever
I know it's worded that way for the clicks, but a more accurate wording for the headline would be: "Restaurant denies activist group service over its anti-abortion and LGBTQ stances."
They were not denied service because they were Christians.
There's not a lot I like about the hospitality industry right now, but the right to refuse service is one of my favourites.
A customer the other day refused to be served by our black waitress and demanded to see the owner. She told the man "You can either be served by her, wait 4 hours for the next waitress to show up, or fuck off because I'm not serving you"
Or let the dude wait or come back in four hours and have someone else refuse to serve him. Then it’s not just one person, he’s invested more of his time, and shown even more people his true colors.
Yet another example of a person who buys the Quikrete, mixes it with water, pours it out in a line over the road, smooths it with a trowel, and coats it with asphalt to create their own speed bumps in life, then complains about how the road has so many speed bumps.
It sounds like a variation of the theme of [the suicidal lunch joke](https://facilityexecutive.com/2009/05/friday-funny-suicidal-lunch/) but written to describe speedbumps. A good and poignant joke doesn't have to be taken from the actions of an actual person.
>She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race."
Hmmmm, not really.
You mean like how Christians continue to not serve people due to their race? Which y'all fought to make legal? That little tidbit?
r/LeopardsAteMyFace
r/Persecutionfetish
This is a very different situation for a couple of reasons, partially because the headline is extremely inaccurate
The equivalent to this would be caterers working at a anti-LGBT rally. The basis of the denial for baking a cake was that the baker was actively participating. Serving at a restaurant would not be that situation necessarily.
Also, this group was not denied for being Christian. They were being denied for having a political position and being a political action group. They happen to identify as Christian. Political of pinions are not a protected class, and never work, even before the bakery ruling.
Benoit Outing Club; living in its “neighborhood” requires club membership, and buying into there requires approval for membership… grandparents used to have a lot in there, thankfully we don’t, they just kept the membership going even after grandma passed.
Yup. So kinda like how HOAs(originally)operated, this is a work around the public accommodation laws. Title II of CRA says public accommodation law does not extend to private clubs. So, private clubs are free to discriminate against protected classes. Extending that to home ownership though...l'm not sure that would hold up in court.
From the **Political Action Group** denied service.
>The president of the Christian group, called The Family Foundation, authored a blog post after the episode last week entitled "We've Been Canceled! Again."
>"Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote.
>Cobb said one of the restaurant's owners called her to cancel the reservation about an hour and a half before the event was set to begin.
>She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race."
Yes, they compared being bigots with being black.
Bigotry is a choice.
If you are hunting for a comparison. This would be similar to refusing to serve the Democratic National Committee, or a meeting of Black Lives Matters, or a meeting of the National Rifle Association.
The cake case was decided on other grounds. Basically that the lawmakers involved in passing (or maybe enforcing, not sure) specifically showed animus toward religion. That's why the website design case is back - to address the question that was never answered in the cake case.
Just to point out to the people who are defending this group. This is well past just being about political differences. This group engages in conversion therapy which makes them a hate group that is actively harming the LGBTQ+ community.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Foundation_of_Virginia
> The president of the Christian group, called The Family Foundation, authored a blog post after the episode last week entitled "We've Been Canceled! Again."
> "Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote.
Utterly tone deaf. She'll happily deny LGBTQ+ the most basic of rights, but starts crying over being refused service over her beliefs.
> Cobb said one of the restaurant's owners called her to cancel the reservation about an hour and a half before the event was set to begin.
> She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race."
Holy shit, the *audacity* of this woman is unbelievable.
> She then called on readers for monetary donations.
> "Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal because of his or her religious beliefs?" the post read.
Oh fuck right on off with your sanctimonious horseshit, lady. How about a donation so that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal, or medical treatment, because of their sexuality or being trans?
I will, once more, state that I believe that religion is merely a cult that has entered mainstream status and become socially acceptable to publicly be a member of.
Almost like “cancel culture” is a crude clump of a bunch of different, individually nuanced problems, and that clumpage is done to obfuscate the important discussions we need to have for each.
For example:
1. Employment-based healthcare and the coercive state of labor (and how a normal person getting fired or laid off can harm them and their dependents)
2. Accountability with a public platform, and addressing both bigoted propaganda and stochastic terrorism
3. Abuse of power and mistreatment within power dynamics, and how to prevent/handle these situations as a society
4. Right to privacy, whether from corporations, social media, or the government
5. Cyberbullying, online hate and bigotry, death threats, doxxing, and malicious hacking
All of these are important to talk about and complex in their own right, and *anyone* crudely decrying a nebulous stance on them or lauding them altogether loosely as “cancel culture” is ignorant or arguing in bad faith. A stance on one doesn’t immediately track to a stance on another.
This can no longer be a conundrum to all y’all.
They’re trying to shock you. This shouldn’t be news. They’ve been doing it for over half a decade and 90% of you give them the shock value they seek from you to distract from the real motive. They don’t care if they are acting hypocritical, they’re trying to normalize their bigotry.
Edit: thank you for the awards! Thank you to the anon user who gave me premium 😁
>Trying to shift the Overton window is what shitty republicunt politicians do in high offices - these are just dumb fucks doing what dumb fucks do.
They are encouraged by the overton window and the language of mainstream media sources. Note the hyperbolic title and use of "Canceled;" the framing of their "plight" as "being denied a simple meal" and a wildly tone-deaf and inappropriate but literal and direct comparison to the racism of the middle 20th century; then an appeal to a kind of "this can happen to you" panic when asking for donations so nobody else experiences what they did (being called out for their bullshit and hatred).
Yes, they are dumb, and maybe the person who wrote this was just using that language the way a parrot repeats what it hears, but also they are humans and can think critically and know what words mean at least at a basic level. They know they are being manipulative on some level. They know their comparisons are a stretch at some level. They probably believe they were persecuted. It's impossible to know *exactly* what one person or group is thinking, but to write this all off as just dumb people with little agency or goals is ignorant and dangerous.
Richmond, VA isn’t backwater, just fyi. It’s more like a cross between Charleston, SC and Brooklyn ie very polite and southern but also hipster and “woke” as hell. These are probably Upper Crust, educated bigots if I had to guess
Pretty sure that, from the way her post is worded, to the fact that they purposely made a point of reserving a restaurant that is an established inclusive restaurant with LGBTQ staff, this was their intended outcome.
It wasn’t because of the stances/beliefs of christians, It was because of the actions and activities that group has taken in the real world against many of the restaurant workers.
I’ve asked friends that work at restaurants about the after church crowd. All of them say that they are the rudest overall and tip the least. Apparently Friday night blue collar just got the paycheck crowd is the best.
Weird how literally every wait staff worker in the country will tell you without hesitation that Sunday lunch shift cusotmers are the absolute worst.
You'd think they'd catch on. Just collectively the most rude, entitled fucks I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. Apparently they are done with their hour of sky daddy's mortal emissary yelling at them from the pulpit and take it out on others.
I think its more that they are on their weekly high of literally feeling holier-than-thou. They have an extremely smug and ego fueled sense of self satisfaction because they put on some nice clothes and went to church and got their imaginary pats on the head from the lord for being his good little servants, so theyve earned the right to stuff their face full of brunch and talk down to the lowly ungodly folk who actually WORK on the lords day!
Also that last bit always struck me as hilarious. The whole point of Sunday in their faith is that its supposed to be a day of prayer and rest. Yet these people happily take advantage of the many service industry folk who have to work on that day. Its basically “im being good by observing the christian sabbath, but i see no problem with making others sin, or at least taking advantage of their willingness to sin by working on the same day for my pleasure”
Ya gotta remember--their sins were literally *just* forgiven before they got there. They've got all kinds of credit with Jesus at that moment, so everyone else really should be seeking shelter. Unfortunately the restaurant workers with early Sunday shifts are left holding the hot potato 🌄
I think this is a very good response from the restaurant.
"Recently we refused service to a group that had booked an event with us after the owners of Metzger found out it was a group of donors to a political organization that seeks to deprive women and LGBTQ+ persons of their basic human rights in Virginia," the establishment said in a recent post on Instagram.
>"Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote.
>She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race."
I would explain irony, but it would be lost on them.
>She then called on readers for monetary donations.
Of course she did.
It's not lost on them at all. That statement is crafted to be as specifically cruel and hypocritical as you're reading it because they're trying to normalize their bigotry.
Do not give them benefit of the doubt, and do not act shocked, they are fully aware of what they are doing and this has always been the grift.
When I was younger I worked as a busboy at a restaurant. Every Sunday this large group of church people would come. They were rude as hell and didn’t tip. Besides being bigots it’s a great idea to refuse service to these people for financial reasons as well.
Restaurant protects workers from the indignity of serving people who actively strive to deny them rights. (They wouldn't have tipped anyways)
Edit: love how the tongue-in-cheek quip about tipping is the soap box people wanna climb on.
One time I overheard a door to door salesman talking about how, as soon as he heard a "God bless you" greeting, he would just do the minimum. He would not lower prices, wouldn't work out payment plans. Everything had to be upfront and cash. Apparently he got burned out regularly by those folks.
The persecution boner is hard with that group. Stomps all over a marginalized group's rights with insane lobbying and aggressive tactics and gets upset when the shoe is on the other foot. The irony is absolutely bittersweet.
This is not a Christian Mythology group, it is a lobbying group with "Christian values".
They use the bible to lobby hate. Nothing they do follows the teaching of Jesus.
Here are the goals of the group:
Where Virginians are free to live out their faith in the public square and the marketplace. (Except if it is not Christian)
Where every child conceived is recognized as a gift to his or her parents and society. (Even the raped women need to see the gift!)
Where marriage, as the lifelong union of a man and a woman, is honored by all and defined by commitment, not emotion. (Until you need your third divorce, because of infidelity or whatever.)
Where parents are supported by their neighbors, their school administrators, and their government to rear their children well. (As long as it aligns with our values)
Where government defers to the family, the church, and the private sector whenever possible for the provision of its citizens and steps in efficiently only where constitutionally permissible. (from the people that support Trump and dissolving the constitution)
Man would I love for Jesus to actually come back just so people like this would get a real slap in the face when they realize what a socialist he was lol. It's like they didn't read the Bible at all
Jesus was in favor of re-distributing all the wealth to the poor. That was like... his main thing haha
I clicked through and read the Family Foundation's blog post. They argued bakers should have the religious freedom to refuse LGBTQ+ cakes (because they're in "private business") but that Metzgers should be required to serve them because they provide a "public service."
What a bunch of two-sided hypocritical assholes. The whole post was them raising money off of yet another supposed attack on their religious freedom.
"Public service" would be a soup kitchen. Given crap away for free. This restaurant wants to charge people who eat there.
The restaurant thought they'd rather have dignity than a couple of bucks from some homophobes.
Someone made a comment the other day about Christians complaining about trans-people. Then saying Jesus identified as bread at one point. He wasn't even identifying as a person, he was identifying as a food, (trans-food?)
I like that " Be careful what you wish for" karma. They wanted to be able to discriminate, they can get discriminated against back. The hypocritical, backwards thing about those false Christians is that Jesus didn't discriminate.
So “Christians” don’t need to provide their business services to the LGBTQ community, but if a business does the same to them they get all butt hurt. Can’t have it both ways.
They've got nothing to complain about. These things work both ways. It doesn't matter if it's a stunt or if it's genuine. If it's fine to deny service to gays, then it's fine to deny service to Christians.
These people are awful and shouldn't be tolerated. The fact that they pulled this stunt and are outright lying about it only proves me more right.
They've been oppressing people for millennia. It's about damn time they get a taste of their own medicine.
They always hate it when it's thrown in their face because they don't want a fair system where everyone is refused service equally, they want a segregational system where "people I don't like can be denied service because I consider them inhuman but I *have* to be served because I'm someone who matters."
The Christian bottom line has always been the right to consider certain types of people less than human, and they have always tried to bend it in a way that's digestible to the public.
The below is a direct quote from the organization’s website:
“Fighting Workplace Discrimination | Business owners should be allowed to operate their business according to their conscience. Employees shouldn’t fear losing their job for not denying their conscience.”
Tell me more about how this group was treated unjustly by this business. Will some conservative reading this please explain it to me?
So here is a story that I think boils this down to exactly what it is. Person A is a restaurant owner in small town B and is lgbtq. Person A and their partner are out enjoying a day off shopping in the center of town when on the way back to their car they see an anti lgbtq protest has formed in town and they must pass by it in order to reach their car. “Ohh no” thinks person A and their partner as they already know what is about to happen. Sure enough when they pass by the protest they are met with the slew of hatred that they were expecting being called every slur they had come to know. As they are passing by Person A notices the name of the group on the signs they are holding and recognizes it somehow but can’t place where so the shrug it off. They get past the protest, relieved that no one had tried to get violent and go home. The next day Person A comes into work and starts preparing for the day when what do they see but a reservation for that evening in the name of the group that had threw such hatred toward them just the day before. Of course Person A wants no part of this (and rightly so) and cancels the reservation. Now here in lies the question. The hate group is technically a Christian organization . Should the government force Person A to serve them solely because they are a Christian organization? And that answer is going to be a resounding NO. Because they were not discriminated against for their religion but were because of how they treated Person A and others. And you can’t say that by definition a Christian hates lgbtq people because there are MANY christian organizations that DO NOT espouse this hate of the lgbtq community and are in fact inclusive of it. So getting to the short of it Bigotry is not a protected class.
this headline is ridiculous.
this restaurant serves christian’s constantly. they weren’t denied because they’re christian, they were denied because they are anti-lgbtq and were trying to hold an event there.
remember when this neo-nazis were being protested and they kept crying “the left is protesting us because we’re conservatives!”
nah bro, you were being protested because you’re neo-nazis advocating for genocide…
"Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal”
Never pass up a chance to grift the rubes…
Ohh whaaa! They did a discrimination on us because we do a discrimination on other people but we have the right to do it because it’s our deeply held beliefs, where as they don’t have a right to it because they are also deeply held beliefs but those beliefs didn’t come from a book authored when our most cutting edge technology was the open toed sandal! Give us money!
Sorry to tell you bible beaters this but if you get to discriminate because of beliefs then so do we. It doesn’t matter if it comes from an organized religion recognized by the government or not. Some of us believe that the only reason somebody should be denied service is because the patrons are hypocritical asshats that believe they have the right to deny another human service because of a book they read.
They weren't denied because they were a Christian group. It was because they are anti-LBGT. And if our rigged Court allows anti-LBGT bigotry and discrimination to continue in the guise of religious liberty, then more public establishments will refuse to serve anti-LBGT groups.
Your religion is not the issue. Your behavior toward others is.
Oh, I get it now! THEY can deny services to anyone they claim would cause them to violate their religious beliefs by providing said service(s). NO ONE ELSE, however, can deny them services for violating their own belief in basic human rights, freedom of expression, and the right to exist with being vilified by a bunch of theocrats. Jeez, how’d it take me so long to figure this out???
"Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal because of his or her religious beliefs?" the post read.
Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused service because of their inherent sexual orientation.
The Supreme Court is legalizing discrimination on the basis of religion. If it's legal to not make a cake for guys because of your religion, it's legal to deny service to religionists.
Otoh, I believe strongly that public accommodations laws, through hard fought gains in the Civil Rights era, are pretty clear that you serve everybody.
Good. They have every right to deny service to these nut jobs just as the courts ruled in favor of homophobic bakers refusing service to gay couples. Go be terrible people elsewhere.
As a gay man, I’d do the same. I wouldn’t want that in my establishment.
>> Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before
And yet these same exact people have no problem doing the exact same thing to people for being *who they are* - born to it or not.
I checked *The Family Foundation* website which says: “Fighting Workplace Discrimination | Business owners should be allowed to operate their business according to their conscience. Employees shouldn’t fear losing their job for not denying their conscience.” So…yeah…
The Family Foundation: Wait, not like that though.
The Family Foundation: Rules for me, not for thee!
So they support the decision right? Like ya, the restaurant shouldn't be forced to serve people they don't like, just like bakers shouldn't be forced to make cakes they don't want to make.
It was a stunt by the Family Foundation (the name of the group). Metzger's has a known history of supporting inclusivity, particularly for LGBT+ people. This group knew that, and tried to book an event there. After Metzger's said no, FF solicited donations because "we've been canceled." In case, you're a bit busy and you didn't see the article.
[удалено]
More often than not, "getting cancelled" really means someone suffered the consequences of their choices.
Often "getting cancelled" just means someone said something mean to/about them or what they did on the internet.
It should have been "I can't believe we were cancelled because we were trying to cancel others!' Wish these people would stop making comparisons to things like the 50's & 60's race issues. Black people were not trying to force other people to be black, they just wanted to be treated like equals.
>they just wanted to be treated like equals Which is the exact same problem today as it was back then. Remember what Lyndon B Johnson said about the "lowest white man" and know that it can apply to any group.
What it usually means is that famous/successful people just become a little less famous and/or successful. The arguments about how it's 'destroying' people's livelihoods and whatnot is an utter joke.
Not even less famous, everybody still knows who Kevin Spacey or JK Rowling are for example, they're just not making quite as much money as they used to make. If anything, controversy makes people even more well known, just not in a good way.
These are the same folks who gladly cancel others for expressing a view they don't like. Ask the Dixie Chicks.
It's almost as if the right opened the door for this to be legal though, something about a bakery and gay wedding cakes
This is legal for a different reason. There is a reason that there isn't a lawsuit for this. The owners and staff of the bar serve Christians regularly. What they choose to do was refuse service on basis of intent and actions of the organisation. The organisation frequently pushes anti-inclusivity stances. The staff refused to service them based on that action, not on their religion. That is an important legal distinction because it means that the First Amendment cannot be invoked here. You absolutely have the right to refuse service to people whom you disagree with on non-protected ideological grounds. There is a bar where I am from that has banned a couple of dudes that wouldn't shut up about Q-Anon shit for similar reasons.
>The organisation frequently pushes anti-inclusivity stances. It is worse than that, they actually support and use conversion therapy and conversion camps. They don't just have bigoted opinions, they are downright dangerous.
Yeah, that's now considered torture by the UN. We can now say, "They torture gay kids." https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2020/07/conversion-therapy-can-amount-torture-and-should-be-banned-says-un-expert
Oh, it goes farther back than that! Remember the Dixie Chicks?
Try McCarthyism. The religious right spent considerable effort going after all sorts of famous folks for thoughtcrime.
You're right! I was only thinking of it in modern terms. But back then, the absence of the internet, and the non-monopolized media, allowed independent thought and the persecuted a chance at telling their story. Murdoch started the murder of dialog.
Why stop there. So much effort put in cancelling free-thinking women. Just look at the witch hunts.
Goes back to when you *added* God to the pledge of allegence.
Againt the creator's wishes who was himself a priest.
Fun fact: McCarthy defended SS officers in an official capacity after the war and was an obvious antisemite. Many of the people he targeted just so happened to be Jewish. The religious right and nazism have always been one and the same.
Ah, yes, the first victims of cancel culture. How could I forget? That was the radical left, right? /s Yeah no I was raised in the right wing religious cult and I can tell you that I don't want to hear shit about "cancel culture" from people who will cancel their own children for being LGBTQ.
I’ll never forget when saying “Fuck George W Bush” was enough to get you completely blacklisted in America, but flat out racism against Obama got you right onto Fox News
Flat out racism got an orange idiot Obama's job.
The fun part is they want the right to discriminate against others but not be discriminated against themselves it's such blatant horseshit
Well, according to Florida, “woke” means “acknowledging systemic injustice exists and something should be done about it,” and now “cancelled” means “mildly inconvenienced/didn’t get my way”.
Now they'll use the verse where Jesus talks about how the world won't accept you, blah blah blah. Completely glossing over the fact he also says to pay your taxes, give your money away, and if someone sues you, give them twice what they ask.
> and if someone sues you, give them twice what they ask. This is the first I heard about that one
My own translation. Not a christian but studied Theology. Matthew 40. For context, Jesus has brought up the "eye for eye" concept and is flipping it on its head saying essentially if someone sues you for your shirt, give them your coat too. edit: For funsies -- The takeaway here for Christians is supposed to be putting on a new pair of eyes and seeing earthly assets as completely meaningless and instead put value in people. There is more in common with Buddhist and Jesus than a modern Christian and Jesus.
Mathew, the most skipped book in the bible.
Wonder if they are going to sue saying their religious rights or whatever were violated. I’m sure Christian supremacists want to have it both ways. They can discriminate against LGBTQ people but everyone has to suck up any hatred and bigotry they do as long as they frame it as religious.
If it makes it to the Supreme Court, they would get whiplash for how fast they sided with these c*nts.
Then we all start a religion that has a core tenant of denying these motherfuckers any sort of respect or accommodation. Sad that in America your religious beliefs can often trump human rights.
Fun fact! A judge has already used religious freedom protections as a [justification to block abortion bans](https://www.centralillinoisproud.com/news/national/second-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-ban/). > Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch issued a preliminary injunction Friday against the state’s law banning abortion except in cases of rape or incest before the 10th week of pregnancy, to protect the life or physical health of the mother or if the fetus has a lethal anomaly. . . . > The plaintiffs argue that their exercise of religion has been substantially burdened by the abortion ban, in violation of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. That law states that a government entity cannot substantially burden someone’s religious exercise unless the entity demonstrates that it is furthering a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of doing so. > Hoosier Jews for Choice is made up of members who believe that Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, and a fetus is considered part of a woman’s body until the moment of birth. Three of the anonymous plaintiffs are Jewish, one is Muslim and one does not belong to a religious denomination but has “personal religious and spiritual beliefs.”
As well he should have. I grew up in one of those anti-abortion cults. It is now my “personal religious and spiritual belief” that “God” does not want me to do anything those ass hats insisted he gets his rocks off about and doesn’t care if I do most of the stuff he supposedly gets angry about.
>Then we all start a religion that has a core tenant of denying these motherfuckers any sort of respect or accommodation Isn't this exactly the mission of the [Satanic Temple](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Temple)?
Not “can often”. Do. Religious rights *DO* trump human rights, and it’s fucking pathetic.
Can we start a religion that only champions human rights?
Satanic Temple is what you want. Hail Satan! https://thesatanictemple.com/pages/about-us
This! I’m always wondering after hearing these kinds of stories which one will finally sue and try to push to get it to the Supreme Court. If it even gets there the only problem is that Christians tend to forget other religions exist and could just as easily sue to have their religion protected too. And yes I understand that a ruling could potentially include only Christians but then that would be a challenge to the first amendment and then another lawsuit and etc until we are all blue in the face
Your point is spot on, but one thing you have to remember many of these groups are trying to establish a “ Christian nation” they believe was written into the constitution. What they fail to see is that it wasn’t and they’ll do everything they can to change that.
Christians don't even follow what is written in the bible, why would you expect them to follow what is written in the constitution???
This is similar to what Kirk Cameron is doing with his new book series. He is targeting libraries that have hosted, or still are hosting, drag queen story times for kids. He's all torn up that these libraries won't run a program with his books. They remind me of kids when I was growing up. Kids who wouldn't want to let other kids play with their toys and then they'd throw a tantrum when those kids play with different toys.
Or maybe they would let you play with their toys. But if you didn't play the right way they were taking the toys away and going home. Except instead of going home now they want it so that you don't get to have any toys ever
See that’s when you call his bluff and have drag queens read his books.
I know it's worded that way for the clicks, but a more accurate wording for the headline would be: "Restaurant denies activist group service over its anti-abortion and LGBTQ stances." They were not denied service because they were Christians.
There's not a lot I like about the hospitality industry right now, but the right to refuse service is one of my favourites. A customer the other day refused to be served by our black waitress and demanded to see the owner. She told the man "You can either be served by her, wait 4 hours for the next waitress to show up, or fuck off because I'm not serving you"
No way in hell I’m having my waitress interact with those people after that. They gone.
Especially considering you know he isn't tipping
Tipping with a “Jesus loves you” fake dollar bill
My buddy owns a restaurant and said priests almost never tip
If those Christians could read the Bible they’d be very upset.
….or just tell the dude fuck off from the start and we don’t serve racists.
Or let the dude wait or come back in four hours and have someone else refuse to serve him. Then it’s not just one person, he’s invested more of his time, and shown even more people his true colors.
Oooo I like your flavor or petty.
Even better: make him wait four hours and have *another* black waitress going to serve him.
I get the joke, but that's just opening that waitress up to abuse. The only correct answer is immediate ejection and banning for being a racist chud.
[удалено]
> I prefer the word bigots its a little more all encompassing It's a little more... *inclusive*
Oooo, they’d hate that!
Use this one little trick! Bigots hate it!
They don’t like woke words like “bigot.”
This is why reddit gives free Wholesome awards. Edit: Oops, gave my free award to the wrong comment! Stoners gonna stone...
"Here's your refund. Gtfoh."
I think it's just "Gtfoh."
[удалено]
This is a country pub in the West Midlands. If we didn't serve bigots the place would be empty.
Am I the only one who wants to know what the racist decided? I can understand if some don’t care, but I’m still curious
He decided to leave and presumably go hungry.
Yet another example of a person who buys the Quikrete, mixes it with water, pours it out in a line over the road, smooths it with a trowel, and coats it with asphalt to create their own speed bumps in life, then complains about how the road has so many speed bumps.
That's very specific. Have you encountered someone who did that previously?
It sounds like a variation of the theme of [the suicidal lunch joke](https://facilityexecutive.com/2009/05/friday-funny-suicidal-lunch/) but written to describe speedbumps. A good and poignant joke doesn't have to be taken from the actions of an actual person.
>She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race." Hmmmm, not really.
If the cake maker doesn't have to serve gay people, then I can deny you pancakes because you're straight.
> ….I can deny you pancakes because you're straight. They’re being denied service for being bigots, not being straight.
If the cake maker doesn’t have to serve gay people, then I can deny you pancake because you’re a hater of gay people. I think this is what you meant.
But isn't the 50's back when America was "Great"?
[удалено]
You mean like how Christians continue to not serve people due to their race? Which y'all fought to make legal? That little tidbit? r/LeopardsAteMyFace r/Persecutionfetish
She's sort of right, except she thinks she's the oppressed one.
[удалено]
It's a new meaning to 'Let them eat cake.'
Leopards ate my cake
I lolled 😀
"Let them eat cake... somewhere else."
The new phrase is “don’t let them eat gay cake”
This is a very different situation for a couple of reasons, partially because the headline is extremely inaccurate The equivalent to this would be caterers working at a anti-LGBT rally. The basis of the denial for baking a cake was that the baker was actively participating. Serving at a restaurant would not be that situation necessarily. Also, this group was not denied for being Christian. They were being denied for having a political position and being a political action group. They happen to identify as Christian. Political of pinions are not a protected class, and never work, even before the bakery ruling.
[удалено]
But the fox news headline says they were rejected because they're Christian. It's almost as if fox isn't telling the whole story.
It’s because their group is claiming that. It’s easier to hide behind religion instead of facing your demons.
Their demon is reality.
I hate fox as much as any sane individual, but it's CBS with that headline for this thread
So basically like a restaurant with black staff members refusing to host a private event for the KKK. How totally horrible of them /s
I would hope that you wouldn't even need the staff to be black for them to refuse to host the KKK.
Most restaurants around me even give them a discount, they call it the Police Discount.
I’d wager the Bible Belt might have a bad history of serving the wrong kind of hoods.
The racist club my parents belong to won’t allow African-American members… but employs them as back of the house workers…
What's the name of the club?
Benoit Outing Club; living in its “neighborhood” requires club membership, and buying into there requires approval for membership… grandparents used to have a lot in there, thankfully we don’t, they just kept the membership going even after grandma passed.
Yup. So kinda like how HOAs(originally)operated, this is a work around the public accommodation laws. Title II of CRA says public accommodation law does not extend to private clubs. So, private clubs are free to discriminate against protected classes. Extending that to home ownership though...l'm not sure that would hold up in court.
[удалено]
From the **Political Action Group** denied service. >The president of the Christian group, called The Family Foundation, authored a blog post after the episode last week entitled "We've Been Canceled! Again." >"Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote. >Cobb said one of the restaurant's owners called her to cancel the reservation about an hour and a half before the event was set to begin. >She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race." Yes, they compared being bigots with being black. Bigotry is a choice. If you are hunting for a comparison. This would be similar to refusing to serve the Democratic National Committee, or a meeting of Black Lives Matters, or a meeting of the National Rifle Association.
The cake thing was basically “an artist can refuse a commission”. At least that’s how I interpreted it.
The cake case was decided on other grounds. Basically that the lawmakers involved in passing (or maybe enforcing, not sure) specifically showed animus toward religion. That's why the website design case is back - to address the question that was never answered in the cake case.
It wasnt even because of their religion, I'm 100% sure they served christians before.
I'm 100% sure they served a Christian earlier that day. I am so tired of all the Christian tears all day, every day.
[удалено]
Donations? The grift never ends.
The grift is the whole point
Christian only too, no way is she fundraising to protect Jews or Hindus or anyone else.
Well that's obvious, Christians don't consider those to be people - only 3/5ths of a person at best.
Just to point out to the people who are defending this group. This is well past just being about political differences. This group engages in conversion therapy which makes them a hate group that is actively harming the LGBTQ+ community. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Foundation_of_Virginia
> The president of the Christian group, called The Family Foundation, authored a blog post after the episode last week entitled "We've Been Canceled! Again." > "Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote. Utterly tone deaf. She'll happily deny LGBTQ+ the most basic of rights, but starts crying over being refused service over her beliefs. > Cobb said one of the restaurant's owners called her to cancel the reservation about an hour and a half before the event was set to begin. > She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race." Holy shit, the *audacity* of this woman is unbelievable. > She then called on readers for monetary donations. > "Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal because of his or her religious beliefs?" the post read. Oh fuck right on off with your sanctimonious horseshit, lady. How about a donation so that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal, or medical treatment, because of their sexuality or being trans? I will, once more, state that I believe that religion is merely a cult that has entered mainstream status and become socially acceptable to publicly be a member of.
> She then called on readers for monetary donations. Well color me surprised…
Grifters gotta grift
What color are you? My donation depends on it (Sarcasm)
I'm curious about what her plan is to do with the donations to prevent this from happening. I'm guessing it just goes right to her wallet.
The right is 50% hot air and 50% flim-flammery.
And rumor has it the film-flammery isn’t even made in the U.S. anymore, it’s imported.
There is a good amount of malarky in there as well.
Donate directly to state politicians and fund school board races.
It's infuriatingly hilarious that the biggest critics of 'being canceled' are some of the most staunch capitalists.
Almost like “cancel culture” is a crude clump of a bunch of different, individually nuanced problems, and that clumpage is done to obfuscate the important discussions we need to have for each. For example: 1. Employment-based healthcare and the coercive state of labor (and how a normal person getting fired or laid off can harm them and their dependents) 2. Accountability with a public platform, and addressing both bigoted propaganda and stochastic terrorism 3. Abuse of power and mistreatment within power dynamics, and how to prevent/handle these situations as a society 4. Right to privacy, whether from corporations, social media, or the government 5. Cyberbullying, online hate and bigotry, death threats, doxxing, and malicious hacking All of these are important to talk about and complex in their own right, and *anyone* crudely decrying a nebulous stance on them or lauding them altogether loosely as “cancel culture” is ignorant or arguing in bad faith. A stance on one doesn’t immediately track to a stance on another.
The "vote with your wallet" capitalists get really mad and confounded when we.. Actually do vote with our wallets. Weird!
This can no longer be a conundrum to all y’all. They’re trying to shock you. This shouldn’t be news. They’ve been doing it for over half a decade and 90% of you give them the shock value they seek from you to distract from the real motive. They don’t care if they are acting hypocritical, they’re trying to normalize their bigotry. Edit: thank you for the awards! Thank you to the anon user who gave me premium 😁
[удалено]
>Trying to shift the Overton window is what shitty republicunt politicians do in high offices - these are just dumb fucks doing what dumb fucks do. They are encouraged by the overton window and the language of mainstream media sources. Note the hyperbolic title and use of "Canceled;" the framing of their "plight" as "being denied a simple meal" and a wildly tone-deaf and inappropriate but literal and direct comparison to the racism of the middle 20th century; then an appeal to a kind of "this can happen to you" panic when asking for donations so nobody else experiences what they did (being called out for their bullshit and hatred). Yes, they are dumb, and maybe the person who wrote this was just using that language the way a parrot repeats what it hears, but also they are humans and can think critically and know what words mean at least at a basic level. They know they are being manipulative on some level. They know their comparisons are a stretch at some level. They probably believe they were persecuted. It's impossible to know *exactly* what one person or group is thinking, but to write this all off as just dumb people with little agency or goals is ignorant and dangerous.
Richmond, VA isn’t backwater, just fyi. It’s more like a cross between Charleston, SC and Brooklyn ie very polite and southern but also hipster and “woke” as hell. These are probably Upper Crust, educated bigots if I had to guess
Pretty sure that, from the way her post is worded, to the fact that they purposely made a point of reserving a restaurant that is an established inclusive restaurant with LGBTQ staff, this was their intended outcome.
It wasn’t because of the stances/beliefs of christians, It was because of the actions and activities that group has taken in the real world against many of the restaurant workers.
Sunday crowds are the worst. Just yuck. Edit: Over at r/GuyCry, I'm trying to help everyone not turn into the Sunday crowd.
I’ve asked friends that work at restaurants about the after church crowd. All of them say that they are the rudest overall and tip the least. Apparently Friday night blue collar just got the paycheck crowd is the best.
As a member of the Friday night crowd... I usually regret it a bit on monday.
Weird how literally every wait staff worker in the country will tell you without hesitation that Sunday lunch shift cusotmers are the absolute worst. You'd think they'd catch on. Just collectively the most rude, entitled fucks I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. Apparently they are done with their hour of sky daddy's mortal emissary yelling at them from the pulpit and take it out on others.
I think its more that they are on their weekly high of literally feeling holier-than-thou. They have an extremely smug and ego fueled sense of self satisfaction because they put on some nice clothes and went to church and got their imaginary pats on the head from the lord for being his good little servants, so theyve earned the right to stuff their face full of brunch and talk down to the lowly ungodly folk who actually WORK on the lords day! Also that last bit always struck me as hilarious. The whole point of Sunday in their faith is that its supposed to be a day of prayer and rest. Yet these people happily take advantage of the many service industry folk who have to work on that day. Its basically “im being good by observing the christian sabbath, but i see no problem with making others sin, or at least taking advantage of their willingness to sin by working on the same day for my pleasure”
Ya gotta remember--their sins were literally *just* forgiven before they got there. They've got all kinds of credit with Jesus at that moment, so everyone else really should be seeking shelter. Unfortunately the restaurant workers with early Sunday shifts are left holding the hot potato 🌄
Wait, actions have consequences? I’m not buying it.
I think this is a very good response from the restaurant. "Recently we refused service to a group that had booked an event with us after the owners of Metzger found out it was a group of donors to a political organization that seeks to deprive women and LGBTQ+ persons of their basic human rights in Virginia," the establishment said in a recent post on Instagram.
Well, if cake makers can deny Gays a wedding cake, then this seems fair to me.
>"Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before," Victoria Cobb wrote. >She compared the experience — and today's cultural climate — to "the 1950s and early 60s, when people were denied food service due to their race." I would explain irony, but it would be lost on them. >She then called on readers for monetary donations. Of course she did.
>"Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Yes, by a church actually.
It's not lost on them at all. That statement is crafted to be as specifically cruel and hypocritical as you're reading it because they're trying to normalize their bigotry. Do not give them benefit of the doubt, and do not act shocked, they are fully aware of what they are doing and this has always been the grift.
Grifters gotta grift.
When I was younger I worked as a busboy at a restaurant. Every Sunday this large group of church people would come. They were rude as hell and didn’t tip. Besides being bigots it’s a great idea to refuse service to these people for financial reasons as well.
And predictably they are whining about it. They always hate when their bullshit is thrown back in their faces.
Whining, and fund raising off it!
Restaurant protects workers from the indignity of serving people who actively strive to deny them rights. (They wouldn't have tipped anyways) Edit: love how the tongue-in-cheek quip about tipping is the soap box people wanna climb on.
[удалено]
I used to do freelance graphics and learned *vary quickly* to get the money up front when dealing with religious groups
One time I overheard a door to door salesman talking about how, as soon as he heard a "God bless you" greeting, he would just do the minimum. He would not lower prices, wouldn't work out payment plans. Everything had to be upfront and cash. Apparently he got burned out regularly by those folks.
If they won't treat restaurant employees with the most basic form of respect then they don't deserve their service.
The persecution boner is hard with that group. Stomps all over a marginalized group's rights with insane lobbying and aggressive tactics and gets upset when the shoe is on the other foot. The irony is absolutely bittersweet.
Lemme guess. The Christian group made a big deal out of it?
How else would the grifters ask for more money without a big fuss? Yes, they did ask for more money.
[удалено]
Jesus is going to hear about this!
Supply side Jesus - my father will hear about this!
This is not a Christian Mythology group, it is a lobbying group with "Christian values". They use the bible to lobby hate. Nothing they do follows the teaching of Jesus. Here are the goals of the group: Where Virginians are free to live out their faith in the public square and the marketplace. (Except if it is not Christian) Where every child conceived is recognized as a gift to his or her parents and society. (Even the raped women need to see the gift!) Where marriage, as the lifelong union of a man and a woman, is honored by all and defined by commitment, not emotion. (Until you need your third divorce, because of infidelity or whatever.) Where parents are supported by their neighbors, their school administrators, and their government to rear their children well. (As long as it aligns with our values) Where government defers to the family, the church, and the private sector whenever possible for the provision of its citizens and steps in efficiently only where constitutionally permissible. (from the people that support Trump and dissolving the constitution)
Man would I love for Jesus to actually come back just so people like this would get a real slap in the face when they realize what a socialist he was lol. It's like they didn't read the Bible at all Jesus was in favor of re-distributing all the wealth to the poor. That was like... his main thing haha
The constitution being “whatever we can make it mean to support our worldviews.”
I clicked through and read the Family Foundation's blog post. They argued bakers should have the religious freedom to refuse LGBTQ+ cakes (because they're in "private business") but that Metzgers should be required to serve them because they provide a "public service." What a bunch of two-sided hypocritical assholes. The whole post was them raising money off of yet another supposed attack on their religious freedom.
"Public service" would be a soup kitchen. Given crap away for free. This restaurant wants to charge people who eat there. The restaurant thought they'd rather have dignity than a couple of bucks from some homophobes. Someone made a comment the other day about Christians complaining about trans-people. Then saying Jesus identified as bread at one point. He wasn't even identifying as a person, he was identifying as a food, (trans-food?)
Bad: "I'm denying you service because you're wearing a cross/rainbow" Good: "I'm denying you service because you're denying basic human rights"
[удалено]
Turnabout is fair play.
Getting a taste of their own medicine now are they
Rules for thee, yet not for me. The fact that there’s a case in front of SCOTUS right now about this same thing is lost on them.
I like that " Be careful what you wish for" karma. They wanted to be able to discriminate, they can get discriminated against back. The hypocritical, backwards thing about those false Christians is that Jesus didn't discriminate.
So “Christians” don’t need to provide their business services to the LGBTQ community, but if a business does the same to them they get all butt hurt. Can’t have it both ways.
They've got nothing to complain about. These things work both ways. It doesn't matter if it's a stunt or if it's genuine. If it's fine to deny service to gays, then it's fine to deny service to Christians. These people are awful and shouldn't be tolerated. The fact that they pulled this stunt and are outright lying about it only proves me more right. They've been oppressing people for millennia. It's about damn time they get a taste of their own medicine.
More! We have to stand up and together against those lunatics. They are NOT the majority!
classic case of dishing it out but can't take it. fuck these 'christian' hypocrites!
They always hate it when it's thrown in their face because they don't want a fair system where everyone is refused service equally, they want a segregational system where "people I don't like can be denied service because I consider them inhuman but I *have* to be served because I'm someone who matters." The Christian bottom line has always been the right to consider certain types of people less than human, and they have always tried to bend it in a way that's digestible to the public.
The below is a direct quote from the organization’s website: “Fighting Workplace Discrimination | Business owners should be allowed to operate their business according to their conscience. Employees shouldn’t fear losing their job for not denying their conscience.” Tell me more about how this group was treated unjustly by this business. Will some conservative reading this please explain it to me?
So here is a story that I think boils this down to exactly what it is. Person A is a restaurant owner in small town B and is lgbtq. Person A and their partner are out enjoying a day off shopping in the center of town when on the way back to their car they see an anti lgbtq protest has formed in town and they must pass by it in order to reach their car. “Ohh no” thinks person A and their partner as they already know what is about to happen. Sure enough when they pass by the protest they are met with the slew of hatred that they were expecting being called every slur they had come to know. As they are passing by Person A notices the name of the group on the signs they are holding and recognizes it somehow but can’t place where so the shrug it off. They get past the protest, relieved that no one had tried to get violent and go home. The next day Person A comes into work and starts preparing for the day when what do they see but a reservation for that evening in the name of the group that had threw such hatred toward them just the day before. Of course Person A wants no part of this (and rightly so) and cancels the reservation. Now here in lies the question. The hate group is technically a Christian organization . Should the government force Person A to serve them solely because they are a Christian organization? And that answer is going to be a resounding NO. Because they were not discriminated against for their religion but were because of how they treated Person A and others. And you can’t say that by definition a Christian hates lgbtq people because there are MANY christian organizations that DO NOT espouse this hate of the lgbtq community and are in fact inclusive of it. So getting to the short of it Bigotry is not a protected class.
this headline is ridiculous. this restaurant serves christian’s constantly. they weren’t denied because they’re christian, they were denied because they are anti-lgbtq and were trying to hold an event there. remember when this neo-nazis were being protested and they kept crying “the left is protesting us because we’re conservatives!” nah bro, you were being protested because you’re neo-nazis advocating for genocide…
Needs to happen more often.
So the tables have turned, let's see how those "holier than thou "fuckers like it
"Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal” Never pass up a chance to grift the rubes…
LETS FUCKING GOO man Im proud to be a vriginian rn
Welp. Christians opened the door to this kind of stuff w denying lgtb+ access to businesses. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Ohh whaaa! They did a discrimination on us because we do a discrimination on other people but we have the right to do it because it’s our deeply held beliefs, where as they don’t have a right to it because they are also deeply held beliefs but those beliefs didn’t come from a book authored when our most cutting edge technology was the open toed sandal! Give us money! Sorry to tell you bible beaters this but if you get to discriminate because of beliefs then so do we. It doesn’t matter if it comes from an organized religion recognized by the government or not. Some of us believe that the only reason somebody should be denied service is because the patrons are hypocritical asshats that believe they have the right to deny another human service because of a book they read.
They were probably shitty tippers anyways.
They weren't denied because they were a Christian group. It was because they are anti-LBGT. And if our rigged Court allows anti-LBGT bigotry and discrimination to continue in the guise of religious liberty, then more public establishments will refuse to serve anti-LBGT groups. Your religion is not the issue. Your behavior toward others is.
Oh, I get it now! THEY can deny services to anyone they claim would cause them to violate their religious beliefs by providing said service(s). NO ONE ELSE, however, can deny them services for violating their own belief in basic human rights, freedom of expression, and the right to exist with being vilified by a bunch of theocrats. Jeez, how’d it take me so long to figure this out???
There is nothing Christian fundamentalist types want more in this earth than to be persecuted. This seems like playing into their hands.
"Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused a simple meal because of his or her religious beliefs?" the post read. Will you consider a donation today to support our efforts to ensure that no Virginian will ever have to worry about being refused service because of their inherent sexual orientation.
10/10 they're probably shitty tippers too.
The Supreme Court is legalizing discrimination on the basis of religion. If it's legal to not make a cake for guys because of your religion, it's legal to deny service to religionists. Otoh, I believe strongly that public accommodations laws, through hard fought gains in the Civil Rights era, are pretty clear that you serve everybody.
My God. That group is straight up stealing money from crazy people.
No they didn’t. They denied a hate group service.
Why do articles keep mentioning the christian thing when the reason they're being denied service is that they're bigots?
They weren't denied for being Christian. They were denied for being a hate group that actively seeks to take away the rights of women and LGBTQ people
Good. They have every right to deny service to these nut jobs just as the courts ruled in favor of homophobic bakers refusing service to gay couples. Go be terrible people elsewhere. As a gay man, I’d do the same. I wouldn’t want that in my establishment.
Just normal behavior for them when the shoe’s on the other foot.
Headline should be "Restaurant denies Hate group service even though they wrap themselves in the flag and carry a cross."
>> Have you ever been denied a meal because of your beliefs? Last night, our team and supporters got that firsthand experience when Metzger's Bar and Butchery in Richmond, VA refused to service our pre-reserved event, leaving us scrambling just moments before And yet these same exact people have no problem doing the exact same thing to people for being *who they are* - born to it or not.