LGBT Not So Sweet

[rehmwa 2]

wmw999

If the yuppie going into the soul food restaurant chops his fried chicken into little bitty pieces and mixes it with the collards -- does the owner get to object? How about if he does it with his take-out selection?

this is a great point -

The breakdown is people being too much into each other's business.

the bakery owner can sell a cake
the customer can buy a cake

cake leaves store - the owner has nothing to do with it

why does the owner even need to know the details
why does the customer feel obliged to give the details

it's a business transaction, not a social statement - both these groups seem to have forgotten that

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[labrys 0]

Quote

why does the owner even need to know the details
why does the customer feel obliged to give the details

2 straight people walk into a bakery:
"Hi we're getting married and we'd like to buy a cake"

response:
"Congratulations, what did you have in mind?"

2 gay people walk into a bakery:
"Hi we're getting married and we'd like to buy a cake"

response:
"Why do you guys have to flounce around cramming your gay lifestyle down my throat?"

Owned by Remi #?

[turtlespeed 226]

rehmwa

***If the yuppie going into the soul food restaurant chops his fried chicken into little bitty pieces and mixes it with the collards -- does the owner get to object? How about if he does it with his take-out selection?

this is a great point -

The breakdown is people being too much into each other's business.

the bakery owner can sell a cake
the customer can buy a cake

cake leaves store - the owner has nothing to do with it

why does the owner even need to know the details
why does the customer feel obliged to give the details

it's a business transaction, not a social statement - both these groups seem to have forgotten that

When you look at it this way, I think it is VERY possible that the bakery was targeted and this was deliberate from the get go just for their religious beliefs.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rehmwa 2]

that's two potential dialogues: the first is very likely, the 2nd is probably very overstated but let's go with it: the customers are happy and excited about their event, suddenly some dimwit throws a wet blanket all over it.

Good reaction:
So - it's followed by them not buying a cake and moving on to a more friendly store,

then telling 4 of their friends about the experience who then won't buy from the first guy either

and they tell 4 friends, and they tell 4 friends, and so on, and so on, and so on

the market is a funny thing - it works, and people don't have to go over the top, but yet they still do

One of the friends sees a great business opportunity here: they open their own bake shop and very subtly advertise that they will sell and support 'all occasions'. Does it in a classy way, provide a great product, and get all the business.


crappy response:
the couple gets freaked out, self righteous, and they mobilize to devastate the store owner who is likely already on a path to a thin customer base by restricting his options. forgetting about enjoying their special day.

everyone spends a ton of time and money pissing on the vendors and all the other businesses in town. Maybe even going further over the top by harassing patrons (that have no idea about the policy) that are going into and out of the other shops



Your first scenario is great - Congrats, what kind of cake would you like? Nothing happens but a great business transaction.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

turtlespeed

When you look at it this way, I think it is VERY possible that the bakery was targeted and this was deliberate from the get go just for their religious beliefs.

let me rephrase it

"this was possibly deliberate from the get go just for their business policy"

possibly, and with many 'activist' types, very possible

but likely it was more like Labry said - "we're getting married and would like a cake. Here's what we need......(details)". "I'm sorry, we can't provide the type of decoration and verbage you are requiring. Would you like a blank cake? It's the best my boss allows me to do...."

IMHO - The business owner is not very "christian" and he's a crappy business owner that can't differentiate very personal beliefs and how it's supposed to determine HIS behavior vs twisted version of belief and how it is driving him to pass judgement on the behavior of OTHERS.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[labrys 0]

Quote

the market is a funny thing - it works, and people don't have to go over the top, but yet they still do

That's very true. I knew that my second example was over the top (hence the wink), but it's pretty much how a lot of things go, albeit more subtly, in the world.

Take Turtle for example. Based on your pretty balanced conjecture / opinion, he has already announced that it's VERY (not even very) likely that the people who tried to buy the stupid cake in the first place set all of this up on purpose.

Owned by Remi #?

[rehmwa 2]

right, but people win (in the long run) by being the better person. I think actively destroying someone, no matter what the situation is - no matter how righteous it feels, poisons a person just a little bit. And it hurts a lot more than just the target.


but, there are a subset of very visible people when talking (ANY) social agendas, that absolutely are out there just looking for a fight, sometimes even manufacturing one. In today's news media, I don't see how any of us could tell which occur naturally and which are setups....and cynicism does just take over after a while. Since the response to this was pretty major, I can't downplay Turtle's opinion blithely either any more than I can take it.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[turtlespeed 226]

labrys

Quote

the market is a funny thing - it works, and people don't have to go over the top, but yet they still do

That's very true. I knew that my second example was over the top (hence the wink), but it's pretty much how a lot of things go, albeit more subtly, in the world.

Take Turtle for example. Based on your pretty balanced conjecture / opinion, he has already announced that it's VERY (not even very) likely that the people who tried to buy the stupid cake in the first place set all of this up on purpose.

Why is that unreasonable?

They heard about the bakery, and set up a little sting.

You can't possibly believe people are above that.

I think it is amusing that people that demand tolerance are so intolerant of those that don't.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[labrys 0]

Quote

Why is that unreasonable?

I don't think that it's unreasonable at all to list it as a possibility because people really aren't above that kind of behavior.

What I do think is unreasonable is to say that it's VERY likely that they did it on purpose absent any of the actual facts. I classify that as being over the top.

Owned by Remi #?

[DanG 1]

Quote

but, there are a subset of very visible people when talking (ANY) social agendas, that absolutely are out there just looking for a fight, sometimes even manufacturing one.

Gasp! There are people like that??? I'm glad none of them ever show up in Speaker's Corner!

- Dan G

[ryoder 1,590]

DanG

Quote

but, there are a subset of very visible people when talking (ANY) social agendas, that absolutely are out there just looking for a fight, sometimes even manufacturing one.

Gasp! There are people like that??? I'm glad none of them ever show up in Speaker's Corner!

" Listen, and understand. The trolls out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They Don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever..."

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[rehmwa 2]

DanG

Quote

but, there are a subset of very visible people when talking (ANY) social agendas, that absolutely are out there just looking for a fight, sometimes even manufacturing one.

Gasp! There are people like that??? I'm glad none of them ever show up in Speaker's Corner!

that's why I'm amazed when people think every news story is innocent. If 1 out of every 1000 are 'setups', which ones do you suppose are ending up on national news stories......In real life, I operate on 999/1000 are innocent, but for here?>.......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,111]

>but, to actively and directly take action to destroy the business by cutting off supply
>at the vendor source is a pretty vicious line to cross and also a pretty crappy dilemma
>to put on the vendors as well who's only action was to sell their supplies to a customer
>willing to buy them

Why is that a crappy dilemma? Any business needs customers and most need suppliers. Cutting off customers via a boycott is directly taking action to destroy the business. Cutting off suppliers via a boycott is directly taking action to destroy the business. Both require nothing more than people making their own decisions on what they choose to buy. It's a free market solution to the problem.

[rehmwa 2]

billvon

>Why is that a crappy dilemma? Any business needs customers and most need suppliers. Cutting off customers via a boycott is directly taking action to destroy the business. Cutting off suppliers via a boycott is directly taking action to destroy the business. Both require nothing more than people making their own decisions on what they choose to buy. It's a free market solution to the problem.

Your opinion - I think the line should be (self) drawn at direct patronage or direct supply. They are blackmailing the suppliers such that the suppliers aren't really allowed to decide on their own.

"Why is that a crappy dilemma?"

If you tell the customer what's going on and the customer chooses to avoid the business - that's good. if you physically block the customer from going in, that a crossed line.

If you tell the supplier what's going on and the supplier chooses to break the relationship - that's good. if you blackmail the supplier (who likely also sells to 'non-objectionable' businesses) - that's a crossed line.

I think a pure free market has individual decisions being most important. So I differentiate when groups form to overwhelm individuals. I know your philosophy is the opposite - that's fine, I just don't roll that way. Free market - Objection to a business is a passive action (don't patronize it vs patronize it). Once passive goes active, then that's a different approach than free market.

Did I answer your question? YMMV (please don't go all semantic on the terms active and passive - it's such a time waster)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,111]

>If you tell the customer what's going on and the customer chooses to avoid the
>business - that's good. if you physically block the customer from going in, that a
>crossed line.

Agreed.

>If you tell the supplier what's going on and the supplier chooses to break the
>relationship - that's good. if you blackmail the supplier (who likely also sells to
>'non-objectionable' businesses) - that's a crossed line.

Let me ask you this. If you found out that Wal-Mart sold shoes that came from a store that used Indonesian slave labor, and people boycotted Wal-Mart - would that be a crossed line? After all, Wal-Mart also sells products from non-objectionable businesses.

[rehmwa 2]

well, it is Wal Mart. I hear Dick Cheney once parked in front of a Wal Mart.


Don't you have the supply chain backwards in your analogy?

It's more like - Your Local Jumpsuit maker buys braided cord from Big Business Hemp to build grippers. the Jumpsuit maker refuses to sell suits to CrW dawgs (because the suit end up unwashed and smelly after 3 weekends).

Every one decides to boycott Big Business Hemp in support of the CrW dogs social agenda.

(Of course the suit maker then complains that the CrW dogs purposely created this conflict because they hate his stance on environmental cleanliness).


(((now remember, I'm neither a Liberal, nor a religious righty, so I'm not even close to proposing my position should be legislated (default for those guys) - I just think that next step action is not productive or useful in a real sense. and not very classy at all. there would be better and positive ways to spend energy time and money)))



Let me ask you this - A bully attacks you. You Judo flip him (because you don't need a gun or a pointy stick, dammit). Is it useful for you to then kick him in the head a few times, and then go judo flip his teachers and parents? I contend it's sufficient to just go tell them and let them decide as the adults and free individuals that they are.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,111]

>Don't you have the supply chain backwards in your analogy?

Yes. I didn't think that the order was the important issue here. It sounded like your issue was public action harming a company that had only a small percentage of its total business with an objectionable entity, and that that was unfair (i.e. blackmail.)

> I hear Dick Cheney once parked in front of a Wal Mart.

Then let's call it Madame Gaia's Sustainable Green Shoes.

[rehmwa 2]

billvon

>Yes. I didn't think that the order was the important issue here. It sounded like your issue was public action harming a company that had only a small percentage of its total business with an objectionable entity, and that that was unfair (i.e. blackmail.)

I understand. No, But I think the order may be important - and extent also for some issues. How the hell is a sugar and flour supplier know who their customer will sell to? Nor am I certain they should care either way or have to deal with busy bodies about whatever issue of the day is pushing someone's buttons. It's a crappy business model. I sell my product, it's not my business how the next guy in the chain uses it.

Exceptions here would be mostly safety, not social - selling a too hot parachute to someone that will build it into a rig for a newbie. Serving liquor to someone that is sure to drive drunk. etc. Selling poison or bullets to someone that pretty much has a history or shooting or poisoning people.

Though even in those cases, just INFORMING those retailers about the situation would do the job for most to make the right choice. But that's more clear cut. FORCING them without the opportunity to make their own choice is just bullying and not respectful.

You might draw your line in the sand on social issues rather than safety, that's fine, it's just not my thing.



You missed my trick point in the analogy - CrW dawgs don't wear suits. that would require showering. and use of a comb.

Quote

Madame Gaia's Sustainable Green Shoes.

YAY - I'd like to steal that for other posts. thank you

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Dear Flour Company - You can't sell anymore to these 50 small businesses. they are in violation of (insert whatever topic you like, from super important to the equivalent of a Home owner's association gigging on lawn mowing length).

by the way, if you lose revenue, we'll also protest if you lay workers off - especially if they fit my social agenda cosmetic limits.

while you are at it - increase their minimum wages, and supply more health care, and shorten hours. while cutting off those 50 customers.

We realize you have not done anything directly wrong, but we are REALLY distressed about these businesses. Do it. Or there will be hell to pay. We won't help you if they sue you also. United we stand (behind you, not with you.)

Thanks so much
Warm Regards


Maxine Busybody.
President - Home Owners Associate of this City
Chairman - Find a Cause .com
General Bored Housewife trying to justify her life


attached, I've provided you a questionaire template (with all the "appropriate" answers identified). If you could just have each new customer fill this out first. Including who they voted for in the last three elections. We'll be glad to approve of them for whether you allow them to patronize your business. The questionaire is modeled after certain IRS forms - so you know it's GOOD>

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,111]

>Let me ask you this - A bully attacks you. You Judo flip him (because you don't need
>a gun or a pointy stick, dammit).

OK.

>Is it useful for you to then kick him in the head a few times, and then go judo flip his
>teachers and parents?

If they are right there, helping him out as he attacks me? Yes, then they are part of the attack, and it's useful to stop all the people attacking me.

If they decided years ago "no, this guy is a nerd-attacking thug, and I don't want anything to do with him?" Then no.

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

Hi Lyra,

Quote

Does anybody have any further info on what exactly this group did?

Quote

Are they really using those phrases to describe a group that staged a simple protest/boycott of a business, or did this group actually maliciously attack them?

Once again: I live here. Every day I read my entire newspaper. Every day I listen to the nightly news.

I have heard zero about any 'militant activists,' and 'mob tactics,' and 'maliciously attack them.'

There were some folks with signs in their hands in front of the business a couple of times. They were civil and did not stop anyone from entering the business.

Re: 'or did this group actually maliciously attack them? Stand outside their business with pitchforks? Stop people from entering the store? Deface their store front? Throw eggs at them?'

Nope, this IMO is all loony-toon horse-puckey.

JerryBaumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

Hi Doug,

Quote

this is gays targeting others for no reason other than to start shit

You could not be more wrong.

Quote

A Christian bakery bakes things, and they do wedding cakes for Christian weddings.

It was not a 'Christian' bakery, it was 'Sweet Cakes by Melissa', end of discussion.

Now for the record; a women and her mother went into this facility to buy a wedding cake. When the owner ( the guy ) asked what they would the cake to read, they responded with something like 'Congratulations Nancy & Susan,' that is when he refused to provide the cake because he said that he did not believe in that lifestyle.

That is when he violated the laws of Oregon.

The S*** hit his fan, not anyone else's fan.

JerryBaumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

Hi turtle,

Quote

I think it is VERY possible that the bakery was targeted and this was deliberate from the get go just for their religious beliefs.

And you could not be more wrong; see my post above.

JerryBaumchen

PS) IMO there are a lot of people commenting ( with agendas ) who simply do not know the facts in this matter.

[Remster 30]

Quote

PS) IMO there are a lot of people commenting ( with agendas ) who simply do not know the facts in this matter.

Well, hello there, sailor... First time here?

Remster

[labrys 0]

Remster

Quote

PS) IMO there are a lot of people commenting ( with agendas ) who simply do not know the facts in this matter.

Well, hello there, sailor... First time here?

I love both of you

Owned by Remi #?