The Online Onslaught Forums


By contributing to Online Onslaught, you'll help make sure we're around for years to come. Toss us as little as a few bucks, or as much as your generosity allows. Thanks!

Last active: Never Not logged in [Login ]

Printable Version |
Subscribe | Add to Favorites
New Topic New Poll New Reply
Author: Subject: To serve or not to serve...
Flash
The Immortal One






Posts 4552
Registered 4-22-2005
Location Ontario, Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-26-2018 at 03:30 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
To serve or not to serve...

Just curious what everyone thinks about the recent spate of Trump cronies being either heckled (Miller and Nielsen, separate incidents at Mexican restaurants) or outright asked to leave (Huckabee-Sanders) while dining out.

Not sure how I feel about it; On one hand I do think you have the potential for a slippery slope or for it to take away from other issues of service refusal based on racial grounds*, but I also think there's something to be said for a quote I read debating the matter about diners being refused for the content of their character, to say nothing of statements and actions they've said/taken being grounds for the refusal of service/public shaming.

*There is also of course the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the baker who refused to do a custom cake for the two gay gentlemen, so obviously discrimination can take many forms.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Count Zero
The Great One






Posts 3235
Registered 1-29-2013
Location Canada East
Member Is Offline

Mood: Can't Even

posted on 6-26-2018 at 03:34 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
You're not obligated to offer "Freedom Of Service" to people. If places can establish "no shirt, no shoes, no service", why not "if you're a massive shithead doing shitty things right in the public's eyes, no service"? It's the consequences of your public persona being disagreeable. If you want to be treated respectably, act semi-respectably.
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Paddlefoot
Rocco Rock of Jabroni






Posts 10540
Registered 1-19-2008
Location Mordor of the soul
Member Is Offline

Mood: ShitBird McShitHeel

posted on 6-26-2018 at 04:12 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
As the best most current comment making the rounds says, it's unfortunate for the Huckabee creature that she's been judged for the content of her character instead of the colour of her skin. Oh, well, it gives the cultists an opportunity to make her into the next Rosa Parks for a few days. And here she is now, back to work spreading the gospel for POS POTUS!



Anyone know how to translate "those incredibly dangerous toddlers we're separating from their parents at the border are a threat to us all" into the very appropriate-for-this-era Black Speech of Mordor?

EDIT: anyone wondering about the much more intense anti-Trump venom now from at least one of us resident OO Soviet Canuckistanis as compared to the last time the news thread was updated? Well, he kind of declared economic war on our country, effectively wiping out a hundred years of friendship and co-operation between us and the United States, for no other reason than he's an evil, disgusting, and putrid asshole. Can't speak for Flash, Count, or BFG, just for myself but given what he's done I have no other option but to regard Trump as the enemy of my country.

2nd EDIT: awesome column on perspective here

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a21931194/sarah-huckabee-sanders-red-hen-civility/

quote:
This debate is stupid. Itís also dangerously beside the point. SarahHuck is the lying mouthpiece of a lying regime that is one step away from simply hauling people off in trucks. That she was politely told to take her business elsewhere is a small step towards assigning public responsibility to public officials that enable a perilous brand of politics. There are bigger steps to be taken, but everyone in official Washington is too damn timid to do what really needs to be done about this band of pirates.

So, Sarah, since I know it is hard for you to understand even short sentences, Iíll put it as briefly as I can: Take a hike.



[Edited on 6/26/2018 by Paddlefoot]





"Let's go give these Canuckleheads a good ol red-white-and-blue fist-fucking!" - Janerd75

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
bopol
Showstopper






Posts 981
Registered 1-18-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-26-2018 at 05:56 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
The problem with right wing nutjobs is they all want to pretend to be martyrs, so they can further pretend to follow Jesus Christ and Jesus was a martyr, getting murdered on a cross, so getting not served at some local restaurant puts them in Jesus's league.

So when you don't serve a right wing nutjob, you get the national controversy. Add in that Trump is so fucking thin-skinned, he's going to tweet about it.

In the end, I don't think it's worth the bother. But, to double down on what Pad said, as an American that likes what used to be American ideals, there's a little bit of how the fuck am I going to get along with the American nuts that support this guy when all this shit is over. They've dragged everything to shit and I personally think this is what happens when you spend the last thirty years worshiping businessmen and not prosecuting white collar crimes.





I only signed up so I can read the forum.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Flash
The Immortal One






Posts 4552
Registered 4-22-2005
Location Ontario, Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-26-2018 at 06:34 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
Don't get me wrong, the trio I referenced in my first post are all linked to, support, or have some statements linked to some heinous acts but for arguments sake when/where does the "line" come in...

Like can a restaurant ask Republicans to leave/refuse them service simply because they are Republicans? What if a restaurant owner is pro-choice or pro-life, can they eject a known counterpart supporter?

Do we make a distinction between something being that persons day job, or political allegiance and respecting their private life (provided they aren't say openly discussing those beliefs in the restaurant)?

How short of a distance is it between say rejecting clients based on political beliefs and lifestyle choices (maybe they pray before eating, maybe they are a known local adulterer... ect)

At what point is it appropriate for the courts to get involved in potential discrimination cases or is this stuff best left to the court of public opinion (social shaming)?

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Paddlefoot
Rocco Rock of Jabroni






Posts 10540
Registered 1-19-2008
Location Mordor of the soul
Member Is Offline

Mood: ShitBird McShitHeel

posted on 6-26-2018 at 09:10 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by bopol
They've dragged everything to shit and I personally think this is what happens when you spend the last thirty years worshiping businessmen and not prosecuting white collar crimes.


Turning a republic into some kind of fucked up neo-aristocracy that operates like some goombah crime family on the anti-human "ideals" of truly horrible historical cretins like Ayn Rand, and the anarcho-capitalist vultures that surrounded Ronald Reagan, isn't going to end well. Not for the United States, not for the rest of the world.





"Let's go give these Canuckleheads a good ol red-white-and-blue fist-fucking!" - Janerd75

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
OOMike
The Great One






Posts 3943
Registered 1-3-2002
Location Columbus, OH
Member Is Offline

Mood: same ol same ol

posted on 6-26-2018 at 12:29 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Flash
Don't get me wrong, the trio I referenced in my first post are all linked to, support, or have some statements linked to some heinous acts but for arguments sake when/where does the "line" come in...

Like can a restaurant ask Republicans to leave/refuse them service simply because they are Republicans? What if a restaurant owner is pro-choice or pro-life, can they eject a known counterpart supporter?

Do we make a distinction between something being that persons day job, or political allegiance and respecting their private life (provided they aren't say openly discussing those beliefs in the restaurant)?

How short of a distance is it between say rejecting clients based on political beliefs and lifestyle choices (maybe they pray before eating, maybe they are a known local adulterer... ect)

At what point is it appropriate for the courts to get involved in potential discrimination cases or is this stuff best left to the court of public opinion (social shaming)?


Yes, political opinion is not protected

Yes, employment is not a protected status

No, if you don't like them praying, that infringes on religion which is protected, but if they are a whore and cheating on their spouse, yes you can since being an adulterer is not protected.

The point courts get involved is (used to be): sex, race, religion, national origin, disability, age, and depending on the state sexual orientation.

Kicking HuckSan out because she lies, ok. Kicking HuckSan out because she is a white woman, not ok.





2017 where Nazis are defended and being against Fascism is a bad thing.

Prejudices are rarely overcome by argument; not being founded in reason they cannot be destroyed by logic Ė Tryon Edwards

Never let the facts interfere with a good rant.

The only OO columnist that has never written a column.

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
bopol
Showstopper






Posts 981
Registered 1-18-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-26-2018 at 03:27 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
To answer the more generic question, as a business person (I do some consulting on the side), I did refuse to work with one company because they laid me off and I didn't want to deal with them and disturb my calm. They were basically the Sarah Huckabee Sanders of the particular industry (scummy, lying, cheating, etc.). So I guess I would agree that someone has the right to refuse service to a person, as long as it is not a protected class (as OOMike points out).





I only signed up so I can read the forum.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Paddlefoot
Rocco Rock of Jabroni






Posts 10540
Registered 1-19-2008
Location Mordor of the soul
Member Is Offline

Mood: ShitBird McShitHeel

posted on 6-26-2018 at 05:57 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
I assume the greater principle, that Red Hen used, is that they're not legally obligated to associate their business with someone they don't want to. Technically they're in the clear because this idea is a long-time and fully legal tradition of any business that chooses to do so. They didn't kick her out on the basis of race, gender, or orientation so they absolutely did nothing wrong. They could try to sue the restaurant with some bullshit hurt-feelings lawsuit but aside from costing Red Hen the money for their own lawyers it wouldn't get very far in court.

As far as a private citizen or businessman goes I'm fairly certain that the same thing generally applies. If you don't want to work for someone you're probably not obligated to provide a reason why. It's simply your choice to make. Your only concern is that you can't let it slide into a situation where you end up defaming or slandering the other side. You can probably say quite legally "I think those guys are a bunch of dicks" or "I just don't like them" or even "in my opinion they don't treat their employees/contractors very well, and/or in my opinion they don't operate a safe working environment" and that would also be legally sufficient. Anything else though, like calling them rip-off artists or crooks would probably need some kind of paperwork or recorded evidence to keep you safe from being sued.

[Edited on 6/26/2018 by Paddlefoot]





"Let's go give these Canuckleheads a good ol red-white-and-blue fist-fucking!" - Janerd75

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
TownOfDalem
Undisputibed Champion






Posts 2727
Registered 10-4-2007
Location Durham, NC
Member Is Offline

Mood: Waddle

posted on 6-26-2018 at 06:23 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by bopol
To answer the more generic question, as a business person (I do some consulting on the side), I did refuse to work with one company because they laid me off and I didn't want to deal with them and disturb my calm. They were basically the Sarah Huckabee Sanders of the particular industry (scummy, lying, cheating, etc.). So I guess I would agree that someone has the right to refuse service to a person, as long as it is not a protected class (as OOMike points out).


This is a point I think gets a the crux of the issue. We all have a moral line where we won't serve a person. For bopol it's a company he has poor personal history with, for the restaurant it was a person who lies for an administration doing human rights violations. I find it really disingenuous when people act like the refusing service is itself the problem. It's where the line should be that is the problem. For me, I'm fine with any line that doesn't discriminate against a protected class, though my definition of protected class might be slightly broader then the supreme court's definition. Like if the restaurant said they don't serve anyone who votes republican they'd get my side-eye. If it's we won't serve any top ranking officials in the current administration, I say go for it.

For this particular case, Huckabee-Sanders can fuck right off. She spent the entirety of last week refusing to do her job because she knew a press briefing during the immigration firestorm would be hard, then decided to try and make this news. No sympathy.





OO's only mammal penguin

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   TownOfDalem 's Aim
CamstunPWG187
The Rowdy One






Posts 2340
Registered 5-2-2010
Location Harbin, China
Member Is Online

Mood: Barbecue

posted on 6-27-2018 at 04:57 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
The problem here is that this type of stuff lets Republicans use that infamous strategy of taking a single point and using it to supersede any negative that's pointed in their direction (even if it's all bullshit).

Were they in the right? Yes. Should they have gone about it in a different way? I think so. Do that thing where they just don't serve her or make it take forever to get her her food. Take the higher road.

Personally? I might have ordered someone to fuck with her food, just because of who she is. I always let others take the high road, so there's plenty of room for ME on the LOW ROAD


View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
G. Jonah Jameson
Man of a Thousand Holds






Posts 1595
Registered 12-28-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-27-2018 at 08:58 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CamstunPWG187
The problem here is that this type of stuff lets Republicans use that infamous strategy of taking a single point and using it to supersede any negative that's pointed in their direction (even if it's all bullshit).



Yeah, but they'd find a reason to do that anyway, even if this incident hadn't happened. I used to think there was some value in avoiding offending the delicate sensibilities of modern-day conservatives, but these days, I realize they're always going to be able to find something to cry about. And if they can't, they'll just make some shit up, and everyone on their side will believe it.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
bopol
Showstopper






Posts 981
Registered 1-18-2013
Member Is Offline

Mood:

posted on 6-27-2018 at 09:14 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
Well, the fact that they can somehow make being asked to leave a restaurant with some free cheese is the same thing as the most horrible thing ever given that we have a fucking president that makes fun of the disabled means that their power of delusions have no limits.

Which goes back to: I have no idea how we are going to be able to function as a single country going forward. 40% of this country lives in a fantasy and I can't relate with them.

But, no, I would not fuck with Hucklebee's food. That's illegal.





I only signed up so I can read the forum.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
CamstunPWG187
The Rowdy One






Posts 2340
Registered 5-2-2010
Location Harbin, China
Member Is Online

Mood: Barbecue

posted on 6-28-2018 at 03:27 AM Edit Post Reply With Quote
Not even a pull-apart fart on the lemon meringue pie??

[Edited on 6-28-2018 by CamstunPWG187]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
BBMN
HAVES A CROOKED DICK!! !






Posts 2507
Registered 6-27-2007
Location tumblr
Member Is Offline

Mood: SJW

posted on 7-2-2018 at 07:15 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
It's good if only to make a more level headed person pause and think about how "Maybe denying people service based on politics is not a good line of thought..."

Perhaps the whole "We can't serve gay people" folks will have a lightbulb appear atop their heads.... But probably not. They'll just double down. Because that's what they do.

As for Sanders? She's just an empty vessel. I don't give a shit about her, and I think it was pretty dumb to target her. As for the fuck stain that has helped split apart families, to line the pockets of for-profit prisons? Fuck her. She got off easy. She should be shamed out of society.



[Edited on 7-2-2018 by BBMN]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
CCharger
The Immortal One






Posts 4999
Registered 7-21-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Sick of hokey shit

posted on 7-3-2018 at 09:36 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
Being gay is not a choice. It's who someone is. You can't deny service based on who someone is.

Being a corrupt, lying bigot? That's a choice. You absolutely CAN and SHOULD deny service.

Fuck those people.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
anglefan85
Man of a Thousand Holds






Posts 1582
Registered 12-6-2005
Location Long Island, New York
Member Is Online

Mood: Relaxed

posted on 7-3-2018 at 10:32 PM Edit Post Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CCharger
Being gay is not a choice. It's who someone is. You can't deny service based on who someone is.

Being a corrupt, lying bigot? That's a choice. You absolutely CAN and SHOULD deny service.

Fuck those people.


This. All of this.





The WWE: Where no one wins, unless you like Cena, in which case you are a sad little fanboy who will never get laid, but we are happy to take your money away-Moosehead Jack

"She is an estrogen molotov cocktail. It'd be in your best interest not to piss her off."- My thoughts on Firewoman

"Kurt Angle is like a living vortex of the surreal. On the off chance he's not doing, saying or thinking crazy things, people connected to him act crazy by association, caught in the gravitational pull of his insanity."- Ringout from FAN Forums

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member

New Topic New Poll New Reply


go to top


Powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Final SP1
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group
Processed in 0.0546181 seconds, 21 queries