Christian activists booted from Seattle coffee shop: ‘I’m gay. You have to leave’

[K9Buck]

The nonsense about the gay cabal forcing homosexuality and abortions on us. You don't share their positions? Ok.

I don't believe in forcing anyone to be a homosexual nor forcing one to have an abortion. I guess we're in agreement, for a change.

Sissy move

To be honest, your statement didn't make any sense. If you want to rephrase it, I'll try to answer it.

 

[K9Buck]

If turnabout is fair play, I have a question for all of you.

Would you support a coffee shop owner's "right" to kick out people that the owner knew had been out advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No, because that's different.

How is it different? The coffee shop owner asked some people to leave because, apparently, they had been out advocating for a cause in which he didn't support. So where is the difference in this case and in the hypothetical that I provided?

 

[SeaGal]

Again: a business owner has the right to ask a patron to leave for any reason the business owner so desires – provided that reason doesn’t violate public accommodations law..

So I said - and happy I am that you agree with me...very conservative of you.

And again: the patrons were asked to leave the coffee shop because they were hateful bigots, not because they were Christian – resulting in no violation of the law.

Here's where the goofy train always gets sidetracked by the ridiculous. You have no idea whether or not the shop owner lashed out and forced them to leave because of their religion.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If turnabout is fair play, I have a question for all of you.

Would you support a coffee shop owner's "right" to kick out people that the owner knew had been out advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No, because that's different.

How is it different? The coffee shop owner asked some people to leave because, apparently, they had been out advocating for a cause in which he didn't support. So where is the difference in this case and in the hypothetical that I provided?

Because advocating for people is different than saying people are immoral or evil. Duh, man.

 

[K9Buck]

If turnabout is fair play, I have a question for all of you.

Would you support a coffee shop owner's "right" to kick out people that the owner knew had been out advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No, because that's different.

How is it different? The coffee shop owner asked some people to leave because, apparently, they had been out advocating for a cause in which he didn't support. So where is the difference in this case and in the hypothetical that I provided?

Because advocating for people is different than saying people are immoral or evil. Duh, man.

Dumb answer.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If turnabout is fair play, I have a question for all of you.

Would you support a coffee shop owner's "right" to kick out people that the owner knew had been out advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No, because that's different.

How is it different? The coffee shop owner asked some people to leave because, apparently, they had been out advocating for a cause in which he didn't support. So where is the difference in this case and in the hypothetical that I provided?

Because advocating for people is different than saying people are immoral or evil. Duh, man.

Dumb answer.

Says you. You would scoff at any difference, because your narrative is to focus on the similarities, so you can make a cheap "hypocrisy" point. I'll leave you to it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Christian activists booted from Seattle coffee shop…”

…because of their advocacy of hate and bigotry, not because they were Christian.

 

[K9Buck]

“Christian activists booted from Seattle coffee shop…”

…because of their advocacy of hate and bigotry, not because they were Christian.

Is advocating for "traditional" marriage hateful and bigoted?

 

[K9Buck]

If turnabout is fair play, I have a question for all of you.

Would you support a coffee shop owner's "right" to kick out people that the owner knew had been out advocating for the legalization of same-sex marriage?

No, because that's different.

How is it different? The coffee shop owner asked some people to leave because, apparently, they had been out advocating for a cause in which he didn't support. So where is the difference in this case and in the hypothetical that I provided?

Because advocating for people is different than saying people are immoral or evil. Duh, man.

Dumb answer.

Says you. You would scoff at any difference, because your narrative is to focus on the similarities, so you can make a cheap "hypocrisy" point. I'll leave you to it.

Yes, you are a hypocrite. Both have the right to refuse service.

 

[SeaGal]

And if I were to put up fliers outside your door telling the world you are an evil, murderous agent of Satan who should be eradicated, I think maybe I would get a different reaction from you than your careful apologism we are witnessing here

Is that what they did?

Yep! You can find their leaflet yourself.

Nah - I'll wait for the movie.

Strange, isn't it?... the poor coffee shop owner thought he was holding a poster showing an aborted baby printed by 'anti-eradication' folks...and here all along it was really a 'coded' call for the eradication of gays. Who knew?

And you guys wonder why the rest of country thinks you're so ridiculous that you can't be trusted to govern?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yes, you are a hypocrite. Both have the right to refuse service.

Yes, but it's not enforced. They have us at a disadvantage. They need to be taken to court.

"you fags need to leave my business. I'm a Christian." Would that be acceptable to them?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

“Christian activists booted from Seattle coffee shop…”

…because of their advocacy of hate and bigotry, not because they were Christian.

Is advocating for "traditional" marriage hateful and bigoted?

Advocatong for traditional marriage would not include a ban against gay marriage, or disparagement of homosexuals. I dont think you are following. Or you are trying not to follow.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservatives are attempting – and failing – to conflate this incident in the coffee shop with bigoted business owners refusing to accommodate gay patrons in violation of the law – when in fact one has nothing to do with the other.

Again: the thread premise fails as a false comparison fallacy.

Private property owners have the right to prohibit whomever they wish from being on their property for whatever reason.

Private property owners who operate a business open to the general public have that same right – where, being open to the general public, they are subject to appropriate regulatory policy designed to safeguard the general public and ensure economic stability.

Among these regulatory measures are laws which prohibit business owners from engaging in discrimination; many of these laws have provisions for sexual orientation.

Unlike bigoted business owners who refuse to accommodate gay patrons, the owners of the coffee shop have violated no public accommodations law, having exercised their right as private property owners to prohibit certain persons from being on their property for whatever reason.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And if I were to put up fliers outside your door telling the world you are an evil, murderous agent of Satan who should be eradicated, I think maybe I would get a different reaction from you than your careful apologism we are witnessing here

Is that what they did?

Yep! You can find their leaflet yourself.

Nah - I'll wait for the movie.

Strange, isn't it?... the poor coffee shop owner thought he was holding a poster showing an aborted baby printed by 'anti-eradication' folks...and here all along it was really a 'coded' call for the eradication of gays. Who knew?

And you guys wonder why the rest of country thinks you're so ridiculous that you can't be trusted to govern?

The flier itself railed against honosexuals in clear language, and the rainbow hands over the dead fetus was no complicated code.

"Who knew"

Everyone who bothered to look at the flier. So, not you.

And stop being an ignorant sissy. Ignorant, because you are choosing to invent your own version of the flier instead of looking at it. Sissy, because you have yet to admit your positions here arise from your sympathy with their vile ideas.

 

[SeaGal]

Yes, but it's not enforced. They have us at a disadvantage. They need to be taken to court.

"you fags need to leave my business. I'm a Christian." Would that be acceptable to them?

I would not normally support taking something like this to court, but I'm beginning to believe that's exactly what needs to happen. "I'm gay, you have to leave' - unless the guy wants to get an abortion - can only be interpreted as discrimination based on sexual orientation or religion.


Another really goofy tenet of the ridiculous left (as opposed to the principled left) is how on earth can they call advocacy for helpless babies evil and bigoted.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So? While I personally think that any business should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason, if states are going to pass laws mandating Christian businesses cater to gays, how can you, in turn, not force gay owned businesses to serve Christians? You can't have it both ways. That would very much make YOU the bigot.

See why maybe it's not the greatest idea to have the government involved in people's personal business?

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

No jurisdiction has passed a law ‘mandating’ Christian businesses ‘cater’ to gays.

Public accommodations laws have provisions prohibiting discrimination against certain classes of persons – such as race, religion, or sexual orientation.

Semantics. A Christian business can't turn away someone for being gay, hence a gay business cannot turn away someone for being Christian, which appears to be the case here.

 

[SeaGal]

And stop being an ignorant sissy. Ignorant, because you are choosing to invent your own version of the flier instead of looking at it. Sissy, because you have yet to admit your positions here arise from your sympathy with their vile ideas.

Ooooh - love it when a goofy leftist tries to talk dirty to me. so cute.

Step away from the mirror and post up the flier - ezpz.
(the one in the video that you didn't watch )

 

[SeaGal]

Semantics. A Christian business can't turn away someone for being gay, hence a gay business cannot turn away someone for being Christian...

...or heterosexual...if sexual orientation is protected as well as religion.

 

[Gracie]

Can't go just one way. I hope the activists sue and win hundreds of thousands of dollars and the coffee shop has to close.
Quid pro quo.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Unlike bigoted business owners who refuse to accommodate gay patrons, the owners of the coffee shop have violated no public accommodations law, having exercised their right as private property owners to prohibit certain persons from being on their property for whatever reason.

Well, no hypocrisy there!