1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Oklahoma restaurant refuses to serve gays, welfare recipients and the disabled

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Smallpotatoes, Feb 8, 2014.

  1. DeskMonkey1

    DeskMonkey1 Active Member

    I'm torn. On one hand, I want the place to be burned to the ground.

    On the other, I don't like Big Brother saying I have to associated with folks I don't want to. If he doesn't want a black man's money, why should he be forced to accept it?

    I mean, if I opened a bar and said I wouldn't allow in other men, or other white people, would I and should I be prosecuted?

    I lean toward yes, he should be forced to serve anyone willing to pay but I can't just dive in 100 percent.

    Maybe the slippery slope is, OK, he let's them in but gives this shitty food and shitty service. Is he then liable for a lawsuit?
     
  2. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    If a 10-year-old kid walks into a bar and wants a beer, should the owner be allowed to serve him, since, after all, it's his bar?
     
  3. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Indeed. Baron undoubtedly makes the Mount Rushmore of bad analogizers. He is the undiputed bad analogy king of this board.
     
  4. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    In other words, you have nothing.

    What, pray tell, is so flawed about my analogy? Mark's point is that a business owner should be able to serve or not serve whomever he wants because of ... FREEDOM! My point is that there are certain laws that restrict freedom because those laws are designed to protect those who are vulnerable to being mistreated.
     
  5. FreddiePatek

    FreddiePatek Active Member

    Oklahoma is weak sauce. Here's Kansas, bringing the (red) heat:
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/02/13/kansas_anti_gay_segregation_bill_is_an_abomination.html
     
  6. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Drinking age laws are not merely a restriction upon service by a private commercial business. If a kid has a drink in the privacy of his own home he is breaking the law, regardless of whether it involves a commercial business at all, regardless of whether anyone else gave him that drink. It is just a different thing than the issue of service discrimination to legal aged consumers.
     
  7. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    In Texas it is legal for a minor to drink if he is accompanied by a parent or guardian. That's how Johnny Football got off the hook, remember?
     
  8. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    I don't think Texas is the only state where that is true.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page