As a Proud American, I'm Very Happy to See the Confederate Flag Flying at the South Carolina State Capitol Today..

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
Of course that's not what I said but if distorting my words to "win" gets your rocks off enjoy yourself.

Here's an example of my problem with how things have progressed - gay marriage is legal, but a Mennonite couple not wanting to support gay marriage loses their business over it?   Is that really the outcome we all want?   Where is the intersection of the right to religious freedom and the right to gay marriage?   Couldn't the gay couple just go get married elsewhere?   I guess not, they wanted this couple's blood for not toeing the line and they got it.  Everyone loses.

you have a remarkable grasp on the very definition of "freedom"..

It's kind of funny how the people you get the most upset about the prospect of losing their own freedoms love to judge what other people's freedoms should be.

If you don't like 'Merica you can get out!

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

you have a remarkable grasp on the very definition of "freedom"..

It's kind of funny how the people you get the most upset about the prospect of losing their own freedoms love to judge what other people's freedoms should be.

If you don't like 'Merica you can get out!

I find this true also. Sheep.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:



You sound like a virgin

You're on tSwill, bruh, not the tRCMB. C'mon.

Good call. But seriously how you going to get your dick wet on said island? Or is this juggalo island

Blanch32 wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:



You're on tSwill, bruh, not the tRCMB. C'mon.

Good call. But seriously how you going to get your dick wet on said island? Or is this juggalo island

In a not entirely unrelated note, I'm headed to Beaver Island at the end of July.

Blanch32 wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:



You're on tSwill, bruh, not the tRCMB. C'mon.

Good call. But seriously how you going to get your dick wet on said island? Or is this juggalo island

I'd have native bitches or I would bring a hippy chick. It was assumed

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:

I really don't know what you're talking about, but if you're as outraged as I am that the Michigan legislature is anti-gay, I couldn't agree more with you.   Couples loving each other?  Fuck them.  

Of course that's not what I said but if distorting my words to "win" gets your rocks off enjoy yourself.

Here's an example of my problem with how things have progressed - gay marriage is legal, but a Mennonite couple not wanting to support gay marriage loses their business over it?   Is that really the outcome we all want?   Where is the intersection of the right to religious freedom and the right to gay marriage?   Couldn't the gay couple just go get married elsewhere?   I guess not, they wanted this couple's blood for not toeing the line and they got it.  Everyone loses.

Fearing Another Lawsuit, Christian Business Owners Stopped Hosting All Weddings. Now Their Business Is Dead.

Charged with discriminating against a gay couple, the owners of another Christian family-run business are being forced to shut their doors.

“We can’t pretend it’s going to get better,” Betty Odgaard told The Daily Signal in an exclusive interview. “There wasn’t enough business.”

Betty and her husband, Richard, are the owners of Görtz Haus Gallery in Grimes, Iowa.
In 2002, they purchased the 77-year-old stone church and transformed it into a bistro, flower shop, art gallery and wedding venue.

On August 3, 2013, a gay couple from Des Moines asked to rent Görtz Haus for their wedding.

Because of their Mennonite faith, the Odgaards told the couple they could not host their wedding.

Within 24 hours, the couple filed a discrimination complaint through the Iowa Civil Rights Commission.

I'm sure people are dancing in the streets now that this threat to polite society has been nullified.

Jesus! They're running a business. You can't discriminate. Tell me the difference if they didn't serve Hispanics or Asians or Muslims or Hindus ? You really can't see that?

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
Of course that's not what I said but if distorting my words to "win" gets your rocks off enjoy yourself.

Here's an example of my problem with how things have progressed - gay marriage is legal, but a Mennonite couple not wanting to support gay marriage loses their business over it?   Is that really the outcome we all want?   Where is the intersection of the right to religious freedom and the right to gay marriage?   Couldn't the gay couple just go get married elsewhere?   I guess not, they wanted this couple's blood for not toeing the line and they got it.  Everyone loses.

Fearing Another Lawsuit, Christian Business Owners Stopped Hosting All Weddings. Now Their Business Is Dead.




I'm sure people are dancing in the streets now that this threat to polite society has been nullified.

Jesus! They're running a business. You can't discriminate. Tell me the difference if they didn't serve Hispanics or Asians or Muslims or Hindus ? You really can't see that?

He doesn't see anything wrong with blaming the pastor for the shooting deaths in Charleston. We're not dealing with someone grounded in reality.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CORNER BLITZ wrote:

While the other half thinks they're better than a bunch of "slack jawed yokel rednecks that love nascar"

thus completing the cycle and starting it over

Not quite following you there buckaroo

This. Although I'm sure you'd say you don't hate the knuckle dragging nackar folk, your words are the other half of that coin

DWags wrote:

I can't say this enough.  This country hates each other.  There is no compromise, there is no caring. It's my side or you're an asshole.   Do I offend you?  Fuck you I don't care.   Middle ground is gone, it's getting progressively worse everyday, every year, every election.  

Schools are failing in Detroit..... fuck them, here's less money, that will fix it.  
Mental illness among teens under 16 has risen by 80% in the last ten years, fuck them cut programs.
People who love each other but are of the same sex want to get married.. Fuck them, pass laws where doctors who have taken a hippocratic oath don't have to help those queers.

Whatever, I'm pretty much done.   Everybody get a gun.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:


Good call. But seriously how you going to get your dick wet on said island? Or is this juggalo island

I'd have native bitches or I would bring a hippy chick. It was assumed

I might have to revert back to my original question. This response is too basic

Blanch32 wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

I'd have native bitches or I would bring a hippy chick. It was assumed

I might have to revert back to my original question.  This response is too basic

Whatever, brah.

CORNER BLITZ wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Not quite following you there buckaroo

This. Although I'm sure you'd say you don't hate the knuckle dragging nackar folk, your words are the other half of that coin

DWags wrote:

I can't say this enough.  This country hates each other.  There is no compromise, there is no caring. It's my side or you're an asshole.   Do I offend you?  Fuck you I don't care.   Middle ground is gone, it's getting progressively worse everyday, every year, every election.  

Schools are failing in Detroit..... fuck them, here's less money,  that will fix it.  
Mental illness among teens under 16 has risen by 80% in the last ten years, fuck them cut programs.
People who love each other but are of the same sex want to get married.. Fuck them, pass laws where doctors who have taken a hippocratic oath don't have to help those queers.

Whatever, I'm pretty much done.   Everybody get a gun.

No no you silly silly person. You said cycle as if a liberal hating the knuckle draggers somehow feeds into the knuckledraggers saying that it's the preachers own fault he is dead. I don't see how those two things play into each other at all, which they would have to for there to be some kind of cycle.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
What's so crazy about that?   I wouldn't go as far as blaming the pastor directly but he and others that push "gun free zones" as a solution are bat shit crazy.  You have to be some sort of blind idealist to believe that someone with mass murder on their mind is going to do anything but use those zones to their own advantage.  Do you REALLY believe that a nut job is going to see a "gun free zone" and turn around and leave??   You can't be that naive, but obviously plenty of people are since they keep voting for them.

If you wanted to kill as many people as you could where would you go?  Would you choose somewhere that people might fight back?  Or perhaps you'd seek out places that had already disarmed your victims for you like "gun free zones".   Virginia Tech, Newtown, Aurora, Columbine, etc, etc, - ignore the evidence if you choose to but it's out there.

Gun-free zones an easy target for killers

If you can't see what's so crazy about that you're part of the problem.

I guess we see things from different viewpoints.   I think it's crazy that people are afraid of being attacked and their solution is to disarm themselves and everyone around them.  History would tell you that's NOT a good way to prevent an attack.

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
Of course that's not what I said but if distorting my words to "win" gets your rocks off enjoy yourself.

Here's an example of my problem with how things have progressed - gay marriage is legal, but a Mennonite couple not wanting to support gay marriage loses their business over it?   Is that really the outcome we all want?   Where is the intersection of the right to religious freedom and the right to gay marriage?   Couldn't the gay couple just go get married elsewhere?   I guess not, they wanted this couple's blood for not toeing the line and they got it.  Everyone loses.

Fearing Another Lawsuit, Christian Business Owners Stopped Hosting All Weddings. Now Their Business Is Dead.




I'm sure people are dancing in the streets now that this threat to polite society has been nullified.

I have no sympathy for those people. Just like I'd have no sympathy if they didn't allow a couple of two different races to rent their venue. If it were still an operating church, then I'd be okay with them not allowing couples who don't suit the church's religious philosophy to be married in the church. But it's not a church anymore. (Unless I'm misunderstanding and it is, in which case disregard this post.)

I'd equate this to a restaurant owner refusing to rent out a private room for a gay couple's anniversary party because the owner doesn't support gay marriage. Maybe not a perfect analogy, but whatever. Discrimination is discrimination.

So your stance is that the gay couple have the right to demand they violate their religious beliefs.  I'd agree that's where we're at right now in the US, I'm waiting for the ox being gored on the other side.   We'll see then.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

you have a remarkable grasp on the very definition of "freedom"..

It's kind of funny how the people you get the most upset about the prospect of losing their own freedoms love to judge what other people's freedoms should be.

If you don't like 'Merica you can get out!

I never once said get out or anything close to it.  Simply go to one of the other 10 wedding venues that would love to have your business.   But of course that's not the intent here, the intent was to harm these people.   Mission accomplished.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CORNER BLITZ wrote:

This. Although I'm sure you'd say you don't hate the knuckle dragging nackar folk, your words are the other half of that coin

No no you silly silly person. You said cycle as if a liberal hating the knuckle draggers somehow feeds into the knuckledraggers saying that it's the preachers own fault he is dead. I don't see how those two things play into each other at all, which they would have to for there to be some kind of cycle.

Yet somehow those same "knuckledraggers" elected Tim Scott to the Senate with 61% of the vote.   I suppose somehow that provides even more proof of their racism.  It's interesting to note all the Black Senators from the "enlightened" states like NY, CA, MA, CT, RI, DE, etc, etc.  - of course the Dems running those states don't want the Blacks actually having power, they just want their votes.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

It's kind of funny how the people you get the most upset about the prospect of losing their own freedoms love to judge what other people's freedoms should be.

If you don't like 'Merica you can get out!

I never once said get out or anything close to it.  Simply go to one of the other 10 wedding venues that would love to have your business.   But of course that's not the intent here, the intent was to harm these people.   Mission accomplished.

I'll ask again: do you not see they are running a business in our country? Can I discriminate against a Muslim? Or a Hindu? Can my business say I won't cater to Hispanics or Methodists? If I so despised them or thought I was going to hell for serving them why the fuck did I open a business?

On a side note I'm wondering why I'd join a religion that shuns people? I have to say I just can't wrap my head around that. I'm wondering if their God has told them they're going to hell if they serve gay people?

That religion seems to carry a lot of anger and exclusivity in their charter.

LooseGoose wrote:

Cameron wrote:

I have no sympathy for those people. Just like I'd have no sympathy if they didn't allow a couple of two different races to rent their venue. If it were still an operating church, then I'd be okay with them not allowing couples who don't suit the church's religious philosophy to be married in the church. But it's not a church anymore. (Unless I'm misunderstanding and it is, in which case disregard this post.)

I'd equate this to a restaurant owner refusing to rent out a private room for a gay couple's anniversary party because the owner doesn't support gay marriage. Maybe not a perfect analogy, but whatever. Discrimination is discrimination.

So your stance is that the gay couple have the right to demand they violate their religious beliefs.  I'd agree that's where we're at right now in the US, I'm waiting for the ox being gored on the other side.   We'll see then.

So would it be easier for you if we had Jews serving only Jews Methodists serving only Methodists gays serving only gays Hispanics only Hispanics Muslims only Muslims? Then break that down further to women Methodists serving only women Methodists make Jews serving only make Jews etc.?

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
No no you silly silly person. You said cycle as if a liberal hating the knuckle draggers somehow feeds into the knuckledraggers saying that it's the preachers own fault he is dead. I don't see how those two things play into each other at all, which they would have to for there to be some kind of cycle.

Yet somehow those same "knuckledraggers" elected Tim Scott to the Senate with 61% of the vote.   I suppose somehow that provides even more proof of their racism.  It's interesting to note all the Black Senators from the "enlightened" states like NY, CA, MA, CT, RI, DE, etc, etc.  - of course the Dems running those states don't want the Blacks actually having power, they just want their votes.

No, what proves that you are a racist pile of trash is that no one in that conversation you replied to was even remotely talking about race. You brought it up because, well I can only assume, that you are so obsessed with what race people are that it blinds you to the fact that that isn't even what people were talking about.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

It's kind of funny how the people you get the most upset about the prospect of losing their own freedoms love to judge what other people's freedoms should be.

If you don't like 'Merica you can get out!

I never once said get out or anything close to it.  Simply go to one of the other 10 wedding venues that would love to have your business.   But of course that's not the intent here, the intent was to harm these people.   Mission accomplished.

Why can't black folk get married at one of the other ten wedding venues that would be glad to have them. - This exact same arguement 50 years ago.

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
I never once said get out or anything close to it.  Simply go to one of the other 10 wedding venues that would love to have your business.   But of course that's not the intent here, the intent was to harm these people.   Mission accomplished.

I'll ask again: do you not see they are running a business in our country? Can I discriminate against a Muslim? Or a Hindu? Can my business say I won't cater to Hispanics or Methodists? If I so despised them or thought I was going to hell for serving them why the fuck did I open a business?

On a side note I'm wondering why I'd join a religion that shuns people? I have to say I just can't wrap my head around that. I'm wondering if their God has told them they're going to hell if they serve gay people?

That religion seems to carry a lot of anger and exclusivity in their charter.

Religion has constantly been on the wrong side historically. Luckily it's slowly being phased out. It might take 1000 years or more, but as long as we don't nuke ourselves to hell we'll eventually get there.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:No, what proves that you are a racist pile of trash is that no one in that conversation you replied to was even remotely talking about race. You brought it up because, well I can only assume, that you are so obsessed with what race people are that it blinds you to the fact that that isn't even what people were talking about.

Bullfuck.  This conversation has been about race, religion and politics.   All sure subjects to create bitterness.  Bob loves diving into them because he could give a fuck about the sports side of this board.

And BTW to refute your bullshit statement I refer you to post #9 in this thread that was 100% about race:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: wrote:
you can search posting histories if it means so much to you. I'll save you a bit of time and let you know that those who support senseless violence are likely to be found in threads involving Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, etc.

and, yes, South Carolina is free to advocate for state-sponsored racism all they want via the flags they choose to fly on their grounds. And I am free to point this out on a message board. Interesting how that works.

DWags wrote:That religion seems to carry a lot of anger and exclusivity in their charter.  

Yes the Mennonites and their next of kin the Amish are noted for their anger.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:No, what proves that you are a racist pile of trash is that no one in that conversation you replied to was even remotely talking about race. You brought it up because, well I can only assume, that you are so obsessed with what race people are that it blinds you to the fact that that isn't even what people were talking about.

Bullfuck.  This conversation has been about race, religion and politics.   All sure subjects to create bitterness.  Bob loves diving into them because he could give a fuck about the sports side of this board.

And BTW to refute your bullshit statement I refer you to post #9 in this thread that was 100% about race:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: wrote:
you can search posting histories if it means so much to you. I'll save you a bit of time and let you know that those who support senseless violence are likely to be found in threads involving Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, etc.

and, yes, South Carolina is free to advocate for state-sponsored racism all they want via the flags they choose to fly on their grounds. And I am free to point this out on a message board. Interesting how that works.

I wasn't talking to Bob. I was talking to corner blitz. I realize that the nuances of message boards are very complicated and that sometimes there are multiple conversations going on in the same thread.... But try your best to keep up.

This thread is great!

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:This thread is great!

I mean. We're going to solve all the problems. Just give us a few more pages.

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:That religion seems to carry a lot of anger and exclusivity in their charter.  

Yes the Mennonites and their next of kin the Amish are noted for their anger.

You just can't answer the questions I asked. I get that.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:This thread is great!

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
So your stance is that the gay couple have the right to demand they violate their religious beliefs.  I'd agree that's where we're at right now in the US, I'm waiting for the ox being gored on the other side.   We'll see then.

If you want to frame it that way, then sure. But the discriminators presumably aren't participating in the ceremony, so I think putting it that way is an exaggeration. If you want to be in the business of renting wedding venues, then rent the damn venue to anyone who's got the money to pay your asking price. Just like if you own a restaurant, you have to serve anyone who's got money for your food. You don't get to refuse service because you don't like who someone is or how they live their life. A muslim business owner can't refuse to serve a woman who isn't wearing a burka. Not in this country, at least.

If the people in Iowa refused to rent the venue to a jewish couple because jews don't believe that Jesus is the son of God, would that be okay in your book? What if their religion doesn't permit race mixing (and, for all I know, it might not, I don't know shit about Mennonites), would you be fine with them refusing to rent their venue to a mixed race couple?

These are not rhetorical questions (though the answers ought to be so obvious to any thinking person that they might as well be), I'd like direct and honest answers to them.

You're asking me to answer for their faith questions, keep in mind my beliefs may not match theirs, that doesn't mean I can't recognize why they have them.   Since you stated you don't know much about Mennonites a quick word on that.  Mennonites are basically Amish that use *some* (depending on the sect) modern technology.   They generally drive and have electricity, other than that they're very close to the Amish.

I'm certain they're relying on biblical prohibitions on homosexuality as their basis for not wanting to be involved in a gay marriage.   As far as all the other examples being thrown out here interracial marriages, jewish marriages, etc, etc to my knowledge none of those relationships is prohibited by the Bible so they would fall under straw men arguments.

What's being missed here is the root of my opposition - I believe this gay couple sought them out not because they wanted to get married there but because they wanted to punish them for their faith.  That sucks, if you don't think it does then we can just agree to disagree.  I could start another thread on why I'm a bit sensitive on this "problem seeking" issue right now but I'm not sure anyone is interested.

One thing I thought about last night is all the little businesses across America that have the signs on their doors or counters "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" - they're kidding themselves.   If they happen to refuse to serve anyone that can prove they're a member of a protected group the business is dead.  The real reason doesn't matter because the claim will always be discrimination and they'll be presumed guilty.

I think back 35-40 years ago when I was a teenager learning the sales business from my Dad and Uncle.  They sold high ticket items that were warrantied.  More than once I saw them absolutely refuse to sell to a customer.  Their logic was that if a customer was an asshole and hard to deal before the sale that they would only get worse after the sale.   That customer wasn't worth the extra time and effort, even though you made a profit up front by the time you were done with them there was no profit left and you'd had to deal with all the stress on top of that.  The only class of person they were discriminating against was "asshole" but in today's world I don't think they could get away with it.

Cameron wrote: Just like if you own a restaurant, you have to serve anyone who's got money for your food. You don't get to refuse service because you don't like who someone is or how they live their life.

I wanted to pull this out by itself and reply to it. 

We disagree here.  If I've put up the money and effort to open a restaurant I should have some latitude in who gets service.   Your position is that any jackass off the street has more control over my business than I do.   That's just flat wrong.

Say John Doe raped and murdered my daughter and got off on a technicality.  He walks into my restaurant I'm compelled by law to serve him?  He can feel free to make jokes about fucking that bitch but because I'm open for business I can't refuse him service? 

Or maybe John Smith is a local farmer that doesn't believe in showering, he walks into my diner at 11am reeking from the hog pen wearing shit covered boots.  I'm compelled to serve him even though his very presence in the diner will kill my normally very big lunch business?

Where's the line?  I know those are somewhat extreme examples but you're the one stating I've got to serve any paying customer. It's no damned wonder people don't want to open businesses any more.  I've done multiple startups in my life and every now and again think about it again to relieve some of the boredom but I soon realize what a damned fool I'd be, I simply don't need the hassle.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

DWags wrote:

My god.  I just... I can't.....what the..... I mean..... he said..... the fuk

if it weren't so tragic.. and if 9 families weren't planning funerals today while wiping away tears.. you'd almost have to laugh.

these people are insane. And that's probably a diplomatic way to put it.

Speaking of diplomats - if Gun Free Zones are really a workable solution when threatened by mad men why don't you write John Kerry a letter and suggest he have the Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states implement Gun Free Zones over their entire country?  I'm pretty sure once Vladimir Putin heard about that any threat of an invasion by the Russians would be OVAH!!  World problems solved.

I don't understand why Syria and Iraq haven't tried this tactic on ISIS yet, it seems the sane thing to do.  Think of the money Israel could save by buying signs rather than carbines and bombs.

Really once you think about it all the world's good guys should do this.  Just have the US, Canada and all the other NATO members dissolve their armies and dump all their guns and weapons in the ocean.   Use the now unemployed troops to nail up thousands of "Gun Free Zone" signs on the borders.  Place large dumpsters beside those signs for the bad guys to dispose of their weapons before entering our now peaceful land. The world would be a much safer place for all of us with those millions of added acres of Gun Free Zones.

The resulting worldwide peace and lovefest would prove that BobS was the sanest of us all.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

if it weren't so tragic.. and if 9 families weren't planning funerals today while wiping away tears.. you'd almost have to laugh.

these people are insane. And that's probably a diplomatic way to put it.

Speaking of diplomats - if Gun Free Zones are really a workable solution when threatened by mad men why don't you write John Kerry a letter and suggest he have the Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states implement Gun Free Zones over their entire country?  I'm pretty sure once Vladimir Putin heard about that any threat of an invasion by the Russians would be OVAH!!  World problems solved.

I don't understand why Syria and Iraq haven't tried this tactic on ISIS yet, it seems the sane thing to do.  Think of the money Israel could save by buying signs rather than carbines and bombs.

Really once you think about it all the world's good guys should do this.  Just have the US, Canada and all the other NATO members dissolve their armies and dump all their guns and weapons in the ocean.   Use the now unemployed troops to nail up thousands of "Gun Free Zone" signs on the borders.  Place large dumpsters beside those signs for the bad guys to dispose of their weapons before entering our now peaceful land. The world would be a much safer place for all of us with those millions of added acres of Gun Free Zones.

The resulting worldwide peace and lovefest would prove that BobS was the sanest of us all.

Oh that's my favorite one... When you compare us to Ukraine, Iraq, Syria and the rest of the least developed countries in the world and pretend it's the same thing.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
Speaking of diplomats - if Gun Free Zones are really a workable solution when threatened by mad men why don't you write John Kerry a letter and suggest he have the Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states implement Gun Free Zones over their entire country?  I'm pretty sure once Vladimir Putin heard about that any threat of an invasion by the Russians would be OVAH!!  World problems solved.

I don't understand why Syria and Iraq haven't tried this tactic on ISIS yet, it seems the sane thing to do.  Think of the money Israel could save by buying signs rather than carbines and bombs.

Really once you think about it all the world's good guys should do this.  Just have the US, Canada and all the other NATO members dissolve their armies and dump all their guns and weapons in the ocean.   Use the now unemployed troops to nail up thousands of "Gun Free Zone" signs on the borders.  Place large dumpsters beside those signs for the bad guys to dispose of their weapons before entering our now peaceful land. The world would be a much safer place for all of us with those millions of added acres of Gun Free Zones.

The resulting worldwide peace and lovefest would prove that BobS was the sanest of us all.

Oh that's my favorite one... When you compare us to Ukraine, Iraq, Syria and the rest of the least developed countries in the world and pretend it's the same thing.

So your point is that it's only the bad guys from developed countries that respect the "Gun Free Zone" signs?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Dear Knuckle-Dragging, Right Wing Gun Nuts,

We appreciate you wanting to eat at our restaurant. However, since our religion is a religion of peace, we are unable to serve you.

We hope you enjoy the freedoms America has to offer somewhere else.

Sincerely,

Proprietors of a Local Restaurant Who Happen to Be Members of a Peaceful Religion

http://www.inquisitr.com/1482885/waffle-house-texas-dps-trooper-openly-carrying-gun-kicked-out-of-restaurant/

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Dear Knuckle-Dragging, Right Wing Gun Nuts,

We appreciate you wanting to eat at our restaurant. However, since our religion is a religion of peace, we are unable to serve you.

We hope you enjoy the freedoms America has to offer somewhere else.

Sincerely,

Proprietors of a Local Restaurant Who Happen to Be Members of a Peaceful Religion

If I saw that sign I'd happily be out the door.  If they don't want my business I certainly don't want to force it on them.   Especially any jackass that uses the term knuckledragger to describe someone they disagree with - just confirms for me that they're a pompous ass.

Seriously though time to retire the fucking Confederate flag.

The_Dude wrote:Seriously though time to retire the fucking Confederate flag.

Best of luck doing that

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Dear Knuckle-Dragging, Right Wing Gun Nuts,

We appreciate you wanting to eat at our restaurant. However, since our religion is a religion of peace, we are unable to serve you.

We hope you enjoy the freedoms America has to offer somewhere else.

Sincerely,

Proprietors of a Local Restaurant Who Happen to Be Members of a Peaceful Religion

Most states, and I believe Texas is one of them, allow business owners to post a sign saying "no guns". the morons who insist on bringing their guns into an establishment are just attention whores IMO. Probably lack something in their life and need this to bring attention to themselves. Screw em, just post a sign, even in Texas it's a minority of people who believe that you should be able to carry them into places of business. Just the morons will say "A sign wasn't posted properly" so they can get attention or intimidate other patrons.

Don't understand that mentality.