“Indiana’s Chatterbox Jazz Club Threatens Patron with a Bat for Wearing MAGA Hat -Then Kicks Her Out“
Though the threat of physical harm was uncalled for.
Time to rock the boat and let my extreme right-wingness out of its box for a bit – I’m all in favor of a bit of judicious segregation.
Let me know you don’t want me “there” and I won’t go. Just don’t be surprised or “offended” if I return the favor.
I believe the owner of a private business* has every right to “We reserve the right to refuse service“; to serve the customers desired and not serve those not desired. Put up a sign at the door: “Abandon all hope, ye honkies who enter here“. I’ve known places like that, even without the sign.
If a bar owner wants to allow customers to smoke, those that don’t smoke do not have to enter. It’s certainly not the government’s business … and if the bar owner goes out of business because of such a policy, so be it, it’s his concern. And “protestors” do not have the right to argue or block said business.
If I offer custom services, I get to pick and choose those I will work for. “No, I won’t bake your cake. Find someone else or do it yourself.”
If a store wishes to serve only the latest collection of letters and not straight white men, so be it. If a straight white man chooses to not serve those of that latest alphabet soup, so be it.
(There’s a restaurant in town here that makes a point of telling all that it’s “LGBTQ+ friendly”. I don’t go there. Not that I care who or what you sleep with but a place that feels the need to advertise such would probably get me involved in some sort of politics …
… and I’m just looking for a good meal.
They’re probably Democrats. Would they spit in my food knowing I’m not LGBTQ?
If someone doesn’t want blacks or arabs or whites or gays as customers? … there are plenty of businesses that prefer to not serve straight white Americans. That’s OK … just don’t be upset if straight white men don’t want you as a customer.
If store wishes to not serve gays, gays stay out … as the same gays should be able to keep straights out of their places of business. Actually, I’ve found gays – the screaming queen types – to be more one-sided segregationist than any other group. Those I’ve known (I worked theatre for several years) want every “right” to do as they please, to go where they wish … but want to keep straights away from their “special” places (not that I ever understood why a true “straight” would want to go to such places).
(Though there is a tale of me and a girlfriend looking for a room on Castro St in SF over 40 years ago.
We were meeting a gay friend who happened to be the editor of a national magazine in NYC.
He got pissed at that hotel over their treatment of us.
We ended up at the Sir Francis Drake instead … It was a different world back then.)
People love the 1st Amendment because of “freedom of speech” (or hate it for the same reason). A less known phrase is “the right of the people peaceably to assemble” which may also be stated as freedom of non-assembly. Nothing is gained by forcing “togetherness”. Gee – I have relatives I’d just as soon not “assemble” with.
Much might be gained by allowing voluntary separation … aka, segregation. Screw “civil rights”; LBJ messed up this country more with his Great Society than he did with Kennedy’s assassination or Vietnam. How can anyone claim “affirmative action” is not as >ra-a-ay-cist< as any Jim Crow law???
When all these “special” groups argue for “rights”, they’re not seeking equal treatment, they’re arguing for “we’re special” rights (rights being contrary to freedoms). Left-handed, 3-legged dwarfs don’t want equal treatment – they want special consideration because they’re victims of being left-handed 3-legged dwarfs and want the rest of us to be required to bow down to their victimhood.
Bah, humbug …
*A business which chooses to become “public” – that is, raising money on the open market; selling stock on a public exchange for example, should not have that right.
