Conroe brewery pulls out as venue for Kyle Rittenhouse rally against censorship

Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.

Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source

Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.

Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.

Report when things come up.

Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.

Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
newyearnewring
Marchioness
Marchioness
Posts: 567
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2023 3:23 pm

Unread post

SouthernIslander wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 3:38 pm
newyearnewring wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:26 pm I'm not familiar with Southern Star but I know Conroe well and, well, I'm surprised.
I don’t know much about that area. Is it conservative?
Most of the area from Conroe, southwest towards Magnolia, is known for being the seat of the KKK in southwest Texas. The only place you will find a more dense population of KKK members in TX is Waco.
hotspice58
Regent
Regent
Posts: 3505
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:56 am

Unread post

FYI: blacks and Muslims were and are discriminated against because of generalizing. All blacks are criminals and all Muslims are terrorists. But you keep defending discrimination and oppression. Which Rittenhouse did not suffer from.
BobCobbMagob wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 8:53 am No… not in other words… the situation you brought up where someone is yelling and screaming didn’t happen.


This is about renting a facility that everyone else is allowed to rent.


The situation you brought up is why people felt valid discrimination against most other groups that have been discriminated against… because they might bring trouble.


That’s a reason why Black people were discriminated against, Muslims were discriminated against, gays were discriminated against, hell it’s even why people who were thought to possibly have communist beliefs were discriminated against…
mcginnisc wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 8:40 am
BobCobbMagob wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 7:51 am

Then I guess we’ll mark you down as a “yes” vote when it comes to embracing discrimination.

If you don’t learn from history, we’re bound to repeat it…Bring on the House Committee on Un-American Activities…we haven’t had to deal with this type of discrimination for a while, I guess we need a refresher course…
So, in other words, when someone is being belligerent in a store and acting the fool, a business will no longer be allowed to ask them to leave.. Why? Because they are going to scream that they are a protected class and can't be discriminated against. Either a business has the ability to decide not to be associated with people like Rittenhouse, or they don't. According to you, he is being discriminated against and that is a no-no. He is not being discriminated against. Conroe's owner decided he didn't want to host this craziness at his place of business. It is his right as a business owner. If businesses are not allowed to make those decisions, that is infringing on them and their rights. Kyle Rittenhouse has every right to go in and get a beer when the little twit is 21 years of age. Nobody is stopping him. He just can't hold a rally there.
It's the same thing as the restaurant a few months ago that was protecting their staff by not allowing people to have a party there. They are loud mouths and the owner said no because the staff was uncomfortable. You were fine with that because the servers were LGBTQIA+, but now...you are not okay with RIttenhouse being turned away. Either it is okay or its not. It doesn't matter if the owner of the first place was doing it to protect his servers ( I applaud him for it!), he did the same exact thing as the brewery owner. He said no. Was that discrimination too in your book because they are anti-LGBTQIA+ and were told no they couldn't eat there? Rittenhouse is also a loud mouth little twit and was told no. So, now he is whining all over the place because a brewery said no thanks to having his rally there. Both establishments had the right to say no. You can't pick one over the other as they did the same exact thing. ( although the restaurant owner was shady and should have said no much sooner than an hour before hand).
User avatar
SouthernIslander
Queen Mother
Queen Mother
Posts: 9391
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:48 pm
Location: Texassippi

Unread post

newyearnewring wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 4:40 pm
SouthernIslander wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 3:38 pm
newyearnewring wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:26 pm I'm not familiar with Southern Star but I know Conroe well and, well, I'm surprised.
I don’t know much about that area. Is it conservative?
Most of the area from Conroe, southwest towards Magnolia, is known for being the seat of the KKK in southwest Texas. The only place you will find a more dense population of KKK members in TX is Waco.
I kinda had a feeling it was an area like that but I wasn’t sure. Lol! That’s why I was surprised they told him no too.
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20108
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

No, it couldn’t open that door because sexual orientation is a protected class. Political/social groups aren’t.
I do agree with letting natural consequences happen. Let the people have their say. Sometimes it works against the business, sometimes it helps it, but that’s up to the customers to decide.
Pjmm wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 11:43 am
jessilin0113 wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 11:03 am I think a big part of the problem is we can't agree on what "discrimination" means. Maybe operationalize that definition so we are all on the same page. Part of my job requires meeting my members in person; there have been a couple of times when I refused due to "bad vibes". Am I discriminating? Yes, based on instinct, maybe even prejudice. Is it "discrimination"? I'd say no. Individual discrimination is perfectly legal and done every day, based on a judgement call. Some classes of people are protected because of historical prejudice against an entire class (women in general not being able to vote, gay people not being able to be employed, black people not being allowed in certain areas). That was what had to be corrected by law. If this bar had discriminated against KR because he was a man, that is wrong. They can choose to "discriminate" against him personally, as an individual, because they don't like him, that is perfectly allowed. Unless we are suggesting that every place needs to host every person for any reason.

This is a ramble, my mind is not on this any longer, lol.
Yes. We can discriminate on one person or a group for their behavior. I don’t want to host the KKK because they’re a hate group. Same with Nazi groups. If someone comes in and harassed my coworkers I don’t want their business. Heck if they give us a hard time we don’t want them. Yes that might open the door to someone not wanting to bake a cake for a gay wedding. But perhaps the answer to that is let natural consequences happen, I.e boycotts of that business by anyone who is okay with gay marriage. However businesses can’t discriminate based on the S*x, ethnicity, race or religion of that person. I can refuse to do business with Kyle because I think he’s an ass but not because he’s Caucasian. If that’s discrimination so be it. Businesses do and should have right to choose their clients. Hospitals and government agencies are different.
❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
WellPreserved
Donated
Donated
Queen Mother
Queen Mother
Posts: 9737
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:52 pm

Unread post

Momto2boys973 wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 6:50 pm No, it couldn’t open that door because sexual orientation is a protected class. Political/social groups aren’t.
I do agree with letting natural consequences happen. Let the people have their say. Sometimes it works against the business, sometimes it helps it, but that’s up to the customers to decide.
Pjmm wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 11:43 am
jessilin0113 wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 11:03 am I think a big part of the problem is we can't agree on what "discrimination" means. Maybe operationalize that definition so we are all on the same page. Part of my job requires meeting my members in person; there have been a couple of times when I refused due to "bad vibes". Am I discriminating? Yes, based on instinct, maybe even prejudice. Is it "discrimination"? I'd say no. Individual discrimination is perfectly legal and done every day, based on a judgement call. Some classes of people are protected because of historical prejudice against an entire class (women in general not being able to vote, gay people not being able to be employed, black people not being allowed in certain areas). That was what had to be corrected by law. If this bar had discriminated against KR because he was a man, that is wrong. They can choose to "discriminate" against him personally, as an individual, because they don't like him, that is perfectly allowed. Unless we are suggesting that every place needs to host every person for any reason.

This is a ramble, my mind is not on this any longer, lol.
Yes. We can discriminate on one person or a group for their behavior. I don’t want to host the KKK because they’re a hate group. Same with Nazi groups. If someone comes in and harassed my coworkers I don’t want their business. Heck if they give us a hard time we don’t want them. Yes that might open the door to someone not wanting to bake a cake for a gay wedding. But perhaps the answer to that is let natural consequences happen, I.e boycotts of that business by anyone who is okay with gay marriage. However businesses can’t discriminate based on the S*x, ethnicity, race or religion of that person. I can refuse to do business with Kyle because I think he’s an ass but not because he’s Caucasian. If that’s discrimination so be it. Businesses do and should have right to choose their clients. Hospitals and government agencies are different.
Sexual orientation or gender identity are not protected in 27 states.
"The books that the world calls immoral are books that show its own shame." - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Quorra2.0
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:39 am

Unread post

BobCobbMagob wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 9:03 am
Quorra2.0 wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 8:50 am
BobCobbMagob wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 8:22 am I think everyone needs to realize why discrimination occurs…


“Because I hate them”


There’s no other reason….



You can either embrace that as a valid and legal reason to discriminate against someone, or acknowledge that it isn’t.
That’s incorrect. Discrimination occurs through prejudices. Prejudice doesn’t always include hate, it is pre-judging someone. Do you honestly believe that people who are deaf are discriminated against because people hate them? Blind? Autistic? Down Syndrome? Women? Hate can be A symptom of prejudice BUT it is not a primary symptom.
Ok.

Prejudice is the reason…


Are you ok with prejudicial treatment for any non-protected class of people being the norm in American society?


It’s weird to me that we’re even talking about classes of people… as though this prejudicial caste system is a defense against the mistreatment of others…
Though we, general, perceive terms like prejudice and bias in negative connotations, neither term is inherently negative. We all have varying degrees of prejudices, we all have biases. To directly answer your question, yes, I am ok with prejudicial treatment for some non-protected groups of people. I’m perfectly ok if a Jewish baker declines to bake a swastika shaped cake for a Neo-Nazi event. I’m perfectly ok with a Black owned caterer declining to cater a KKK event. I’m perfectly ok with elementary schools running background checks and not hiring S*x offenders. I’m at peace with my prejudices and biases. I take no issue owning them.

Sorry Bobs thought I submitted this the other day. Just got on the device I had typed it on.
Deleted User 1990

Unread post

Quorra2.0 wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:41 pm
BobCobbMagob wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 9:03 am
Quorra2.0 wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 8:50 am

That’s incorrect. Discrimination occurs through prejudices. Prejudice doesn’t always include hate, it is pre-judging someone. Do you honestly believe that people who are deaf are discriminated against because people hate them? Blind? Autistic? Down Syndrome? Women? Hate can be A symptom of prejudice BUT it is not a primary symptom.
Ok.

Prejudice is the reason…


Are you ok with prejudicial treatment for any non-protected class of people being the norm in American society?


It’s weird to me that we’re even talking about classes of people… as though this prejudicial caste system is a defense against the mistreatment of others…
Though we, general, perceive terms like prejudice and bias in negative connotations, neither term is inherently negative. We all have varying degrees of prejudices, we all have biases. To directly answer your question, yes, I am ok with prejudicial treatment for some non-protected groups of people. I’m perfectly ok if a Jewish baker declines to bake a swastika shaped cake for a Neo-Nazi event. I’m perfectly ok with a Black owned caterer declining to cater a KKK event. I’m perfectly ok with elementary schools running background checks and not hiring S*x offenders. I’m at peace with my prejudices and biases. I take no issue owning them.

Sorry Bobs thought I submitted this the other day. Just got on the device I had typed it on.
Here's the thing though...

While everything you just said may be understandable, those are the reasons people give for feeling vindicated in discrimination against my children.

I'm not at peace with everyone else's prejudice and biases because they become weaponized against my kids.


S*x offenders aren't allowed to work in schools because they committed a crime .


People who are gay shouldn't have to defend themselves to the point of continually having to argue why they should be treated like everyone else... That's what discrimination acceptance allows for... Innocent people to be refused equal treatment.


I can't ever support that.
User avatar
Quorra2.0
Regent
Regent
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:39 am

Unread post

BobCobbMagob wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 9:58 am
Quorra2.0 wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:41 pm
BobCobbMagob wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 9:03 am

Ok.

Prejudice is the reason…


Are you ok with prejudicial treatment for any non-protected class of people being the norm in American society?


It’s weird to me that we’re even talking about classes of people… as though this prejudicial caste system is a defense against the mistreatment of others…
Though we, general, perceive terms like prejudice and bias in negative connotations, neither term is inherently negative. We all have varying degrees of prejudices, we all have biases. To directly answer your question, yes, I am ok with prejudicial treatment for some non-protected groups of people. I’m perfectly ok if a Jewish baker declines to bake a swastika shaped cake for a Neo-Nazi event. I’m perfectly ok with a Black owned caterer declining to cater a KKK event. I’m perfectly ok with elementary schools running background checks and not hiring S*x offenders. I’m at peace with my prejudices and biases. I take no issue owning them.

Sorry Bobs thought I submitted this the other day. Just got on the device I had typed it on.
Here's the thing though...

While everything you just said may be understandable, those are the reasons people give for feeling vindicated in discrimination against my children.

I'm not at peace with everyone else's prejudice and biases because they become weaponized against my kids.


S*x offenders aren't allowed to work in schools because they committed a crime .


People who are gay shouldn't have to defend themselves to the point of continually having to argue why they should be treated like everyone else... That's what discrimination acceptance allows for... Innocent people to be refused equal treatment.


I can't ever support that.
What is going on with your children Bobs? Maybe I can help with some perspectives or suggestions to help you advocate for them.

You are thinking singular linear and these are not singular linear issues with singular linear solutions. Equal treatment will never be a viable answer because we are not all equal. This isn't inferior vs superior, it is a fact. We are not all carbon copies sharing a hive mind and a singular soul. Equal treatment contributes to discrimination, tone deafness, infringement of rights, and harms. So who are we going to choose to harm? Who's rights are we going to infringe upon? Who is going to choose or who are we going to choose to give preferential treatment to because that is what equal treatment is. Equal doesn't mean fair. It's not black and white with an either or solution.

It is not harmless to require the Jewish baker to bake a swastika shape cake. Think of it, the cake is a want, its not a need. There are other bakeries. The customer could even bake it themselves. The baker, this is their livelihood, how they support their family and they should have at least some sense of working in a safe environment. Your idea, this idea of equal treatment, gives a person who WANTS, not needs, a specific cake at the expense of the wellbeing of another. Is that fair?

How about this. How about Do no harm to others. How about we treat others with the dignity, compassion, and respect we would want to be treated with. How about understanding that ones rights ends when they infringe on the rights of another. How about we have compassion that there will be some people that others can not treat how they would want to be treated. How about we make equity more important than equal.
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20108
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Perfectly well said.
I agree, equality doesn’t mean treating everyone exactly the same. That’s actually quite a dystopian idea. We’re all individuals, we’re all different. We have different backgrounds, different physical characteristics, different beliefs, different wants, different needs, different experiences, why on earth should we all be treated the same way?
We even have different views on rights and liberties. What I believe is treating me with dignity and respect as a woman may seem sexist to others 🤷🏼‍♀️. Should I be treated in ways I don’t appreciate or want to be treated because it’s the “right” way according to mainstream, modern society?
Quorra2.0 wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:13 pm
BobCobbMagob wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 9:58 am
Quorra2.0 wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:41 pm

Though we, general, perceive terms like prejudice and bias in negative connotations, neither term is inherently negative. We all have varying degrees of prejudices, we all have biases. To directly answer your question, yes, I am ok with prejudicial treatment for some non-protected groups of people. I’m perfectly ok if a Jewish baker declines to bake a swastika shaped cake for a Neo-Nazi event. I’m perfectly ok with a Black owned caterer declining to cater a KKK event. I’m perfectly ok with elementary schools running background checks and not hiring S*x offenders. I’m at peace with my prejudices and biases. I take no issue owning them.

Sorry Bobs thought I submitted this the other day. Just got on the device I had typed it on.
Here's the thing though...

While everything you just said may be understandable, those are the reasons people give for feeling vindicated in discrimination against my children.

I'm not at peace with everyone else's prejudice and biases because they become weaponized against my kids.


S*x offenders aren't allowed to work in schools because they committed a crime .


People who are gay shouldn't have to defend themselves to the point of continually having to argue why they should be treated like everyone else... That's what discrimination acceptance allows for... Innocent people to be refused equal treatment.


I can't ever support that.
What is going on with your children Bobs? Maybe I can help with some perspectives or suggestions to help you advocate for them.

You are thinking singular linear and these are not singular linear issues with singular linear solutions. Equal treatment will never be a viable answer because we are not all equal. This isn't inferior vs superior, it is a fact. We are not all carbon copies sharing a hive mind and a singular soul. Equal treatment contributes to discrimination, tone deafness, infringement of rights, and harms. So who are we going to choose to harm? Who's rights are we going to infringe upon? Who is going to choose or who are we going to choose to give preferential treatment to because that is what equal treatment is. Equal doesn't mean fair. It's not black and white with an either or solution.

It is not harmless to require the Jewish baker to bake a swastika shape cake. Think of it, the cake is a want, its not a need. There are other bakeries. The customer could even bake it themselves. The baker, this is their livelihood, how they support their family and they should have at least some sense of working in a safe environment. Your idea, this idea of equal treatment, gives a person who WANTS, not needs, a specific cake at the expense of the wellbeing of another. Is that fair?

How about this. How about Do no harm to others. How about we treat others with the dignity, compassion, and respect we would want to be treated with. How about understanding that ones rights ends when they infringe on the rights of another. How about we have compassion that there will be some people that others can not treat how they would want to be treated. How about we make equity more important than equal.
❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Deleted User 1990

Unread post

Quorra2.0 wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:13 pm
BobCobbMagob wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 9:58 am
Quorra2.0 wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:41 pm

Though we, general, perceive terms like prejudice and bias in negative connotations, neither term is inherently negative. We all have varying degrees of prejudices, we all have biases. To directly answer your question, yes, I am ok with prejudicial treatment for some non-protected groups of people. I’m perfectly ok if a Jewish baker declines to bake a swastika shaped cake for a Neo-Nazi event. I’m perfectly ok with a Black owned caterer declining to cater a KKK event. I’m perfectly ok with elementary schools running background checks and not hiring S*x offenders. I’m at peace with my prejudices and biases. I take no issue owning them.

Sorry Bobs thought I submitted this the other day. Just got on the device I had typed it on.
Here's the thing though...

While everything you just said may be understandable, those are the reasons people give for feeling vindicated in discrimination against my children.

I'm not at peace with everyone else's prejudice and biases because they become weaponized against my kids.


S*x offenders aren't allowed to work in schools because they committed a crime .


People who are gay shouldn't have to defend themselves to the point of continually having to argue why they should be treated like everyone else... That's what discrimination acceptance allows for... Innocent people to be refused equal treatment.


I can't ever support that.
What is going on with your children Bobs? Maybe I can help with some perspectives or suggestions to help you advocate for them.

You are thinking singular linear and these are not singular linear issues with singular linear solutions. Equal treatment will never be a viable answer because we are not all equal. This isn't inferior vs superior, it is a fact. We are not all carbon copies sharing a hive mind and a singular soul. Equal treatment contributes to discrimination, tone deafness, infringement of rights, and harms. So who are we going to choose to harm? Who's rights are we going to infringe upon? Who is going to choose or who are we going to choose to give preferential treatment to because that is what equal treatment is. Equal doesn't mean fair. It's not black and white with an either or solution.

It is not harmless to require the Jewish baker to bake a swastika shape cake. Think of it, the cake is a want, its not a need. There are other bakeries. The customer could even bake it themselves. The baker, this is their livelihood, how they support their family and they should have at least some sense of working in a safe environment. Your idea, this idea of equal treatment, gives a person who WANTS, not needs, a specific cake at the expense of the wellbeing of another. Is that fair?

How about this. How about Do no harm to others. How about we treat others with the dignity, compassion, and respect we would want to be treated with. How about understanding that ones rights ends when they infringe on the rights of another. How about we have compassion that there will be some people that others can not treat how they would want to be treated. How about we make equity more important than equal.
To be honest, what’s actually going on with my 9th grader is that they are non-binary lgbt, and also in Civics class at school.

Harmless enough, but in that class they go over equal rights, what is socially appropriate, how the government works ect… and the subject of businesses providing services to gay people came up. Through plenty of discussion, she left that class truly hurt, and truly believing that she does not deserve to be treated equally to everyone else.


I mean… we are literally teaching some kids to feel inferior and some kids to feel superior when it comes to what rights they deserve and we’re acting like that is what “equity” means.

It’s shameful.

I really don’t know if I’ve ever felt more furious in my life than that day my child came home feeling that they deserved less than everyone else did.


There is no equity/equality debate I can see when discussing how much innocent people deserve equal treatment in America.
Locked Previous topicNext topic