Diner Takes Down Bacon Sign That Offended Muslim Woman

[boedicca]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I'm going to side with the business owner on this one. It's America and she can do whatever she wants. If she feels she can make more money by taking down the sign then what's the issue? That's about as American as it gets. If she loses money, then she's just another loser business owner.

She absolutely can do what she wants, just as we can voice our displeasure with her.

 

[idb]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Just to remind us...here's the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I didn't see Congress mentioned in the news report...although there may have been developments that I haven't heard about.

 

[boedicca]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Just to remind us...here's the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I didn't see Congress mentioned in the news report...although there may have been developments that I haven't heard about.

Oh, so if anyone other than Congress interferes with a 1st Amendment right, then that's okay?

Good to know.

 

[idb]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Just to remind us...here's the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I didn't see Congress mentioned in the news report...although there may have been developments that I haven't heard about.

Oh, so if anyone other than Congress interferes with a 1st Amendment right, then that's okay?

Good to know.

The point is that the First Amendment right relates to Congress - not between private citizens.
Are you saying that this woman had no right to object?

 

[boedicca]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Just to remind us...here's the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I didn't see Congress mentioned in the news report...although there may have been developments that I haven't heard about.

Oh, so if anyone other than Congress interferes with a 1st Amendment right, then that's okay?

Good to know.

The point is that the First Amendment right relates to Congress - not between private citizens.
Are you saying that this woman had no right to object?

Really, then please explain how people are charged with Civil Rights violations?

 

[Seawytch]

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Do you understand there was no government intervention?

Person 1: please take sign down
Person 2: okay

No 1st amendment issue. Again, you're welcome.

 

[idb]

Again, condolences on your Civics Illiteracy.

Okay, great. Explain how this is a 1st Amendment issue? Use case law.

B@Y, use it to prove that a sign in public is not protected speech, absent zoning standards that limit size, etc.

Just to remind us...here's the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I didn't see Congress mentioned in the news report...although there may have been developments that I haven't heard about.

Oh, so if anyone other than Congress interferes with a 1st Amendment right, then that's okay?

Good to know.

The point is that the First Amendment right relates to Congress - not between private citizens.
Are you saying that this woman had no right to object?

Really, then please explain how people are charged with Civil Rights violations?

Civil Rights prevent discrimination and unequal treatment and are enshrined in law.
That doesn't prevent free speech.
The fact is, the woman had the right to object.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What does that have to do with this non story? They are in no way related. One was art in a private gallery, the other a sign on a public street.

Everything,

You leftists demand that Muslims never be offended - I mean after 9/11 - you love Muslims.

But Christians you openly seek to offend - any chance you get.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

So has anyone have any new news on this story ? I know there was a lot of blowback on Facebook, but did it do any good ?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The store has a right to post a sign advertising bacon
They also have a right to accomodate a customer who doesn't like the sign

Yeah. We get that. 2 + 2 = 4. Pretty simple math, really. That is to say, we get the fact that the restaurant owner and the town manager are nitwits free to do what nitwits do.

What real Americans don't do, however, is play footsy with faux diversity. Real American's tell the enfant terribles of veganism/Islam to eat . . . bacon, lots of it, 'til it comes out their ears.

Check?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Yup! It's happened again, folks. Another foolish over-tolerant American, gives in to another UNtolerant Muslim, demanding that things be done the Muslim way, over the American way. It happened in a diner in Winooski, Vermont, when a Muslim woman who described herself as a “vegan and a member of a Muslim household” called a sign advertising bacon, offensive, the Burlington Free Press reported.

HA HA. How many times have we heard that word ? > ("offensive") So instead of the diner owner simply telling the woman "Sorry, but we don't have any restrictions on bacon in the USA," this dumbo caved in to this amazingly rude Muslim woman and not only took down the sign, but also apologized to her.

This act of cowardice, and disrespect for all Americans, was backed up by the town manager — using words like diversity and tolerance and dialogue. “Winooski is a diverse community, and we like it that way,” city manager Katherine Decarreau told the Burlington Free Press.

Well, sorry Katherine, but diversity is one thing, Dumping American culture (the foods we eat) in order to appease the demands of a foreign culture is downright traitorous and disrepectful to the American people (last time I checked, Vermont was still part of America). How about asking the Muslim woman to exhibit a bit of "tolerance" herself for the WAY WE DO THINGS, here in America ? This reminds me of the infamous Lina Morales-Rising Star incident that blew up over a BLT sandwich.

Needless to say this little chunk of Islamization (like thousands of others before it) enraged many citizens who fired off letters of disapproval. A Todd Starnes (author of the link article) said >> "This is America. We love bacon. If you have a problem with that, then feel free to head to the border. And don’t let the bacon grease hit you on the way out. May God Bless America – liberty and bacon for all!"

May God Bless America – liberty and bacon for all!

Vermont Diner Takes Down Bacon Sign That Offended Muslim Woman Fox News Insider

Wow!
Talk about skewed reporting!
The sign was in a garden, not inside the diner (although to be fair to Fox News, they reported this part correctly in your linked article).

The town manager also said

City Manager Decarreau said the city has no plans to make a policy decision on the advertisement, though she will be asking the Winooski Coalition for a Safe and Peaceful Community for advice.

"Like I said, it's an issue of free speech, and I'm not sure where city government gets involved," Decarreau said.

The diner removed a sign in an outside garden because in their judgement offending a section of the population in a culturally diverse town might be bad for business.
That's a private business decision.
Conservatives and Libertarians should applaud this private company's right to decide what's right for their business.

This is the quality of comment from some on Facebook

"Please try to tell as many people as you can around there about this ISIS loving anti-American business," wrote one commenter. "Let's run them out of business and then run the owners out if the USA. They can go open a place in Palestine."

Right. And the intolerance of petty little shrews in a culturally diverse community is not offensive to anyone, eh?

What needs to happen here: the sane members of that community, if there be any, should demonstrate their distaste for the restaurant owner's cowardice, for the owner's kowtowing to the impertinence of intolerant, self-appointed hall monitors, instead of standing up for real tolerance. In other words, they should find somewhere else to eat.

In the meantime, conservatives and libertarians don't need any lessons about private property rights from the denizens of multiculturalism, i.e., from the conformists of faux diversity. Unlike the obtuse proponents of normative relativism, we know what real tolerance is and what is truly offensive. Check?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

So if it's a business decision, we'll see if they put it back up since there have been many more complaints about it being removed.
I'm betting they'll continue to bend over and grab their ankles for a few who have complained of it being up.

The "complaints" about it being removed have all come from blowhards on the internet, not actual customers.

This from the man who was offended by an idea commonly expressed in America on T-shirts. LOL!

Whether they be customers/locals or not, why would their observations regarding this lunacy make them blowhards?

 

[idb]

Yup! It's happened again, folks. Another foolish over-tolerant American, gives in to another UNtolerant Muslim, demanding that things be done the Muslim way, over the American way. It happened in a diner in Winooski, Vermont, when a Muslim woman who described herself as a “vegan and a member of a Muslim household” called a sign advertising bacon, offensive, the Burlington Free Press reported.

HA HA. How many times have we heard that word ? > ("offensive") So instead of the diner owner simply telling the woman "Sorry, but we don't have any restrictions on bacon in the USA," this dumbo caved in to this amazingly rude Muslim woman and not only took down the sign, but also apologized to her.

This act of cowardice, and disrespect for all Americans, was backed up by the town manager — using words like diversity and tolerance and dialogue. “Winooski is a diverse community, and we like it that way,” city manager Katherine Decarreau told the Burlington Free Press.

Well, sorry Katherine, but diversity is one thing, Dumping American culture (the foods we eat) in order to appease the demands of a foreign culture is downright traitorous and disrepectful to the American people (last time I checked, Vermont was still part of America). How about asking the Muslim woman to exhibit a bit of "tolerance" herself for the WAY WE DO THINGS, here in America ? This reminds me of the infamous Lina Morales-Rising Star incident that blew up over a BLT sandwich.

Needless to say this little chunk of Islamization (like thousands of others before it) enraged many citizens who fired off letters of disapproval. A Todd Starnes (author of the link article) said >> "This is America. We love bacon. If you have a problem with that, then feel free to head to the border. And don’t let the bacon grease hit you on the way out. May God Bless America – liberty and bacon for all!"

May God Bless America – liberty and bacon for all!

Vermont Diner Takes Down Bacon Sign That Offended Muslim Woman Fox News Insider

Wow!
Talk about skewed reporting!
The sign was in a garden, not inside the diner (although to be fair to Fox News, they reported this part correctly in your linked article).

The town manager also said

City Manager Decarreau said the city has no plans to make a policy decision on the advertisement, though she will be asking the Winooski Coalition for a Safe and Peaceful Community for advice.

"Like I said, it's an issue of free speech, and I'm not sure where city government gets involved," Decarreau said.

The diner removed a sign in an outside garden because in their judgement offending a section of the population in a culturally diverse town might be bad for business.
That's a private business decision.
Conservatives and Libertarians should applaud this private company's right to decide what's right for their business.

This is the quality of comment from some on Facebook

"Please try to tell as many people as you can around there about this ISIS loving anti-American business," wrote one commenter. "Let's run them out of business and then run the owners out if the USA. They can go open a place in Palestine."

Right. And the intolerance of petty little shrews in a culturally diverse community is not offensive to anyone, eh?

What needs to happen here: the sane members of that community, if there be any, should demonstrate their distaste for the restaurant owner's cowardice, for the owner's kowtowing to the impertinence of intolerant, self-appointed hall monitors, instead of standing up for real tolerance. In other words, they should find somewhere else to eat.

In the meantime, conservatives and libertarians don't need any lessons about private property rights from the denizens of multiculturalism, i.e., from the conformists of faux diversity. Unlike the obtuse proponents of normative relativism, we know what real tolerance is and what is truly offensive. Check?

Why does anything 'need' to happen?
If someone feels strongly enough about the private business owner's actions then they might refuse to eat there, they might write a letter to the paper, they might complain to their hairdresser...
But, good on you for respecting private rights.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I agree that it's stupid to be offended by a sign that mentions bacon.

It's even stupider to care about it from the other side of the country.

LOL! Whatever you say, Mr. T-shirt, as the disgusting prospect of a community anywhere in the country kowtowing to intolerance vying to be institutionalized flies right over your head; you know, sort of like the institutionalized intolerance of public accommodation codes predicated on ideology/behavior in violation inalienable rights.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

I would have (bacon) made every item (bacon) on the menu include a (bacon) product of some sort.

Well, I guess that's a difference between you and the owners of this restaurant.

They're more interested in being friendly and community-oriented than making ridiculous petty "statements".

From the looks of the backlash, the community favors my sense of humor over some petty whining by a single person.

If the word "Bacon" on a sign offends you, you are beyond overly sensitive.

The "backlash" is coming from idiots like Todd Starnes, not "the community".

It seems to me, from the articles I have read, that the backlash came from all over. From letters, emails, phone calls and yes, even FaceBook.

But, once again, if you are offended by the word "Bacon" on a sign in front a restaurant specializing in breakfast, you are far too sensitive. I would call it lunacy, but that would be insulting to the insane everywhere.

I basically agree but why dump on this business owner about it?
Tell the woman that she's an over-sensitive ass if you like but I'd say that the business owner removed the sign because it wasn't such an important thing that he/she wanted to make a stand over it and because he/she didn't want to get caught up in a political debate...sheesh, that worked well!

Look at the firestorm over businesses attitudes to guns on their premises...who would want to get caught up in something like that?

Actually, to be fair, I get this point. Truly.

Notwithstanding, it's the arrogance of the political left's subversion of language epitomized by the bastardization of terms like diversity, tolerance, acceptance, inclusion and so on . . . that incidents like this underscore. It's an affront to liberty, the essence of which is ideological discrimination and dissent, and the speech codes imposed by leftists on college campuses and the public accommodation codes predicated on normative relativism imposed by leftist politicians and judges in major cities are an existential threat to the same, as they are an existential threat to inalienable rights. And that, my friend, is no small thing. For those of us who are cognizant of the larger implications and the tyranny of this creeping agenda, this incident is no small thing either.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

The owner has the right to cater to the intolerant if he/she chooses, however, my response would have been to inform the woman to take her business elsewhere and that I would be making the bacon sign larger.

 

[protectionist]

The right-wing outrage over this is the real story.

You're saying the right wing are the only ones concerned about Islamization in America ? That's not being too kind to the intelligence of the left-wing.

 

[protectionist]

You're missing the point. It's about Muslims bringing a foreign sick culture to the US, and IMPOSING it on Americans, and expecting us to adapt to THEM (AKA Islamization)

I disagree, It's about censorship and forcing everyone into compliance what me almighty believes on a personal level.

If there weren't thousands of other instances of Islamization like this, I could agree with you. Unfortunately, there are.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Can't she put the sign back later?