(April 3, 2015 at 2:58 pm)Mezmo! Wrote: The interesting thing I just learned about the pizzeria case is that no one was actually denied service. The daughter of the owners said during an interview that they wouldn’t cater a gay wedding. The resulting media headline was, “Pizzeria Denies Service to Gays”. The proponents of tolerance promptly issued death threats.

Ya proponent of tolerance here too, never issued a death threat. Are you a proponent of tolerance?

(April 3, 2015 at 3:04 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 2:48 pm)Mezmo! Wrote: So if a group of Klan in full garb walk into your family diner you wouldn't politely ask them to leave?

If they came in for pizza no I wouldn't kick them out, seeing that I am a pizza joint. If they are there to provoke or intimidate then yes I am well with in my right to do so, just as I would with any group.

Does the owner of a fine dining establishment have the right to enforce a dress code?

(April 3, 2015 at 3:13 pm)Mezmo! Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 3:04 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: If they came in for pizza no I wouldn't kick them out, seeing that I am a pizza joint. If they are there to provoke or intimidate then yes I am well with in my right to do so, just as I would with any group.

Does the owner of a fine dining establishment have the right to enforce a dress code?

Of course, don't be ridiculous. Declining someone entry because their attire doesn't meet the standards of your restaurant is legal and amoral. Declining someone service just because you don't like their sexuality, religion, or race is immoral, and (should be) illegal.

But homosexuality is a choice, right? They can just choose to be not gay while eating the pizza.

Problem solved!

(April 3, 2015 at 3:13 pm)Mezmo! Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 3:04 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: If they came in for pizza no I wouldn't kick them out, seeing that I am a pizza joint. If they are there to provoke or intimidate then yes I am well with in my right to do so, just as I would with any group.

Does the owner of a fine dining establishment have the right to enforce a dress code?

Yes you can enforce a dress code, what does that have to do with religious freedom or the discrimination of homosexuals.

It's yet another false equivocation.

(April 3, 2015 at 3:14 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 3:13 pm)Mezmo! Wrote: Does the owner of a fine dining establishment have the right to enforce a dress code?

Of course, don't be ridiculous.  Declining someone entry because their attire doesn't meet the standards of your restaurant is legal and amoral.  Declining someone service just because you don't like their sexuality, religion, or race is immoral, and (should be) illegal.

So I can turn away a guy without a jacket, but not the dominatrix and her jacket wearing collared slave (i.e. openly displaying their sexual preferences and identity)?

(April 3, 2015 at 3:37 pm)Mezmo! Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 3:14 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Of course, don't be ridiculous.  Declining someone entry because their attire doesn't meet the standards of your restaurant is legal and amoral.  Declining someone service just because you don't like their sexuality, religion, or race is immoral, and (should be) illegal.

So I can turn away a guy without a jacket, but not the dominatrix and her jacket wearing collared slave (i.e. openly displaying their sexual preferences and identity)?

What kind of insane bullshit is this? You can turn away someone if they don't meet the dress code standards of your restaurant, period. If the dominatrix and slave are not up to dress code, then of course you can turn them away for that.

Are you really this dense or are you being intentionally obsfucatory?

(April 3, 2015 at 3:37 pm)Mezmo! Wrote:

(April 3, 2015 at 3:14 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Of course, don't be ridiculous.  Declining someone entry because their attire doesn't meet the standards of your restaurant is legal and amoral.  Declining someone service just because you don't like their sexuality, religion, or race is immoral, and (should be) illegal.

So I can turn away a guy without a jacket, but not the dominatrix and her jacket wearing collared slave (i.e. openly displaying their sexual preferences and identity)?

That's not the same, because you are denying entrance to both of them because of their attire. How do you want to apply that to sexuality? You can tell if someone is gay by their appearance?

If you denied service to the dominatrix while she was wearing suitable attire, that would be a similar situation. But if you present it like this, it's not even an analogy.

The situation is similar because many people who practice BDSM consider it part of their sexual identity. In the same way that someone can self-identify as a gay man, someone else can self-identify as a dominant female. Stepping back from the cafe example, I want to know specifically, yes or no, if a halal caterer can be forced to serve as a collaring/wedding ceremony of a BDSM couple.

Sure it is ridiculous,...now.