General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTennessee Restaurant Throws Out Anti-Gay Lawmaker
From ThinkProgress:
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/01/30/414125/tennessee-restaurant-throws-out-anti-gay-lawmaker/
A restaurant in Knoxville, Tennessee refused to serve state Sen. Stacey Campfield, the man who sponsored the states dont say gay bill, compared homosexuality to bestiality, and most recently told Michelangelo Signorile that its virtually impossible to spread HIV/AIDS through heterosexual sex. I hope that Stacy Campfield now knows what if feels like to be unfairly discriminated against, the Bistro at the Bijou wrote on its Facebook wall on Sunday.
-snip-
That TP article links to this blog:
http://seanbraisted.blogspot.com/2012/01/customer-isnt-always-right.html
There is nothing inconsistent or incoherent about discriminating against those with power who actively discriminate against those without power. There is no difference between refusing to serve David Duke than there is Stacey Campfield. While Campfield's views may currently have more resonance among the American populace, it doesn't change the fact that he wishes discrimination against people based on who they are.
I hope Campfield was refused service for his advocacy of abhorrent beliefs, and I would hope that Nashville establishments would do the same to Stacey and the many other advocates of discrimination within the legislature. As long as the enemies of tolerance and compassion are given aid and comfort by the society at large, they will continue their evil deeds.
An update on that blog links to another blog with this post:
http://blogs.metropulse.com/the_daily_pulse/2012/01/campfield-kicked-out-of-gay-st.html
You might think, given his "Don't Say Gay" legislation, that state Sen. Stacey Campfield might stay away from eateries on Gay Street, but no, yesterday he tried to have brunch at Bistro at the Bijou. We say "tried" because owner Martha Boggs told him to leave.
"I didn't want his hate in my restaurant," Boggs said in a interview this morning. "I told him he wasn't welcome here. ... I feel like he's gone from being stupid to being dangerous, and I wanted to stand up to him."
-snip-
UPDATE: Boggs will be on Michelangelo Signorile's show on the XM OutQ channel at 2:30 to talk about denying Stacey Campfield service. Signorile hosted the interview last week in which Campfield said that straight people basically can't get AIDS. Oh, and we have contacted Campfield for comment, but we have yet to hear anything back.
Link to Boggs' Facebook post, which currently has over 1100 Likes:
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150631803994283&id=68978679282
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)nt
Uncle Joe
(58,420 posts)movie "O Brother Where Art Thou?"
Thanks for the thread, highplainsdem.
bullwinkle428
(20,630 posts)every day this week!
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Will be eating there soon, I tell ya!
highplainsdem
(49,036 posts)66 dmhlt
(1,941 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)until he announces that he supports marriage equality.
VWolf
(3,944 posts)I think that's a bit of a stretch.
onenote
(42,761 posts)he sponsors a dont say gay bill, compares homosexuality to bestiality, and publicly claims that its virtually impossible to spread HIV/AIDS through heterosexual sex.
Since the President hasn't done any of those things there would be nothing inconsistent about serving him and not serving Campfield.
But nice hyperbole.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Don't you think Obama is unfairly discriminating against gays by his opposition to marriage equality?
Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #17)
Post removed
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I would suspect repealing DOMA and telling the justice department to not defend any DOMA lawsuits pretty much is a sign that Obama supports marriage equality.
Plus he was able to repeal DADT
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)And until he does I wll not give him a pass on this issue. If someone claims to be non-racist but states that blacks should not be allowed to marry whites, I would have a similar view.
Just think how awesome an "I was wrong. I support marriage equality" speech would be.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I doubt Obama could do anything to change your mind. So not even worth arguing about it.
Even if he did do the speech you'd probably find something else that wasn't 'just perfect' in your eyes.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)would do it 100% for me. Wouldn't you like him to make that speech?
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I never ever expected Obama to be perfect, but one only needs to watch 10 minutes of any of the recent GOP debates to realize he is still the best choice for 2012. If I waited for him to be the perfect candidate I would love to support I'd die an old woman still waiting for that perfect candidate.
But I still give kudos to Obama for making some of the best advancements of any president EVER in regards to civil rights for the GLBT community. Is it perfect? Heck No. But it's still strong step forwards especially with the request that DOMA be overturned and that the justice department no longer procescute DOMA cases.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But I'm not going to throw my gay friends under the bus by pretending that his position on marriage equality is anything less than disgraceful. Baby steps towards repealing anti-miscegenation laws would not be acceptable, and this is equivalent to what he is doing on marriage equality.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)and realize that we need to work harder to make it happen.
Obama has set the groundwork for DOMA to be repealed via the Supreme Court. THe justices he has appointed will support the repeal and at this time we're probably 4-4 with Kennedy being the wild card. There really isn't a whole lot of anything else Obama can do other than appointing judges that will protect civil rights and signal to congress that he would support the repeal.
Maybe words are important to you but what I see is action. He's done what he has said he would do. Now it's up to Congress and/or SCOTUS to make this happen.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)other than admit that he was wrong when said that gay people should not be allowed to get married. And use his bully pulpit and formidable speaking skills to show leadership on this issue and urge the states to pass legislation allowing for marriage equality. Words *are* important, when they come from the President. When JFK made his anti-Jim Crow speech in the 1960s he showed true leadership in that fight.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Hell I'm still pissed about that decision he made about Plan B although they found a way to loophole around it later on.
Point is this, really?
I've heard enough words to realize they don't mean shit to me unless action is done.
But whatever. I mean I just hope you aren't holding your breath waiting for these things. As for me I'd rather get out there and help support the action that is occuring now.
Geez, it's like arguing with a fundie, where they feel the only way to be saved is just by saying "I believe" and your actions don't matter; whereas anyone who has done any studies on the gospels realize that it is your action that you will be best remembered by".
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)is not unreasonable, I think. And I would not deride Presidential leadership as "words that don't mean shit". The Gettysburg Address, for example, was "just words".
Obviously we both want the same thing. In every civil rights campaign there have always been incrementalists, content with baby steps, and those wanting decisive leadership and action. I am comfortable to be in the latter camp.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I expect him to show leadership on MANY MANY MANY things. Why should civil rights be any more important than ending wars, jump starting the economy, providing healthcare for everyone, providing quality education for our children etc. etc. etc?
Personally, if he was a one-note president I'd be looking for another candidate since there would be hundreds of other notes he would be a total failure on.
As democrats this is our greatest failure with the single issue voters but thanks to the Tea Party - the republicans are becoming just as bad.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)He has ended the recession and reduced unemployment. He is pushing for millionaires to be taxed fairly.
He is far from being a one-note President. But along with everything else, a little civil rights leadership would be very welcome.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I might as well find a brick wall because I might be able to get a better argument?
Obama pushed thru repealing DADT, he has said DOMA should be repealled.
Should I just tape record a message to be replayed each time you reply?
I mean I know that no matter what Obama says in regards to civil rights for GLBT you won't be happy. So go ahead and repeat it again for me if you'd like - whatever makes you happy.
AND btw legislation has been intruduced in congress to repeal DOMA but last time my math checked we don't have the votes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Repeal_attempts
It needs 60 votes to survive the filibuster and no matter how 'fire & brimstone' Obama gets I highly doubt there is a single republican that would support it.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Obama has stated that "marriage is between a man and a woman" because "God is in the mix".
Would you be happy if he retracted this nonsense and used his bully pulpit to push for marriage equality?
Perhaps he is waiting to hear from God; a message, perhaps, in which he "takes Himself out of the mix"?
_ed_
(1,734 posts)Offensive on so many levels. Support for marriage equality would entail getting in front of a podium and expressing your support for marriage equality.
DOMA was repealed? Was I sleeping?
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Obama stated that DOMA should be repealed.
Has it been repealed? Pretty words don't count.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)DOMA will never EVER be repealled by Congress. We're too greatly divided to make that happen. But what Obama has done is to set this case up so that in reality we just need one good DOMA style case to make it to the Supreme Court that we could feasibly see it overturned. (RIght now SCOTUS is at 4-4 with Kennedy being the wild card). With the Justice department no longer supporting this we could see this bill be repealed by SCOTUS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Repeal_attempts
On September 15, 2009, three Democratic members of Congress, Jerrold Nadler of New York, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Jared Polis of Colorado, introduced legislation to repeal DOMA called the Respect for Marriage Act. The bill had 91 original co-sponsors in the House of Representatives.[43][44] However, Congressman Barney Frank and John Berry, head of the Office of Personnel Management, did not support that effort, stating that "the backbone is not there" in Congress. Frank and Berry suggested DOMA could be overturned more quickly through lawsuits such as Gill v. Office of Personnel Management filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders.[45][46]
On February 23, 2011, following Attorney General Eric Holder's announcement that the Obama Administration would no longer defend DOMA Section 3 in court, Senator Dianne Feinstein announced her intent to introduce legislation in the Senate Judiciary Committee to repeal DOMA.[47] On March 16, 2011, the Respect for Marriage Act was re-introduced in both houses during the 112th Congress. The House version was introduced by Nadler,[48] and the Senate version by Feinstein.[49] The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-8 in favor of advancing the bill to the Senate floor, where it would require 60 votes in order to end a potential fillibuster.[50]
What we need is a strong case to get to the Supreme Court - 'Roe V Wade' bill that could make the difference in overturning this bill. If that happens - it won't matter what the law is in the states, it would legalize it everywhere.
FreeState
(10,580 posts)Mind you the DOMA cases in court now were started before Obama took office. I appreciate his not defending the law, regardless of that the law will be judged based on law not what Obama is doing.
When DOMA is gone, and it will be, it will enable the federal government to recognize marriages performed in states hat have marriage equality. It will not make marriage equality in every states.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Until the words "I support full marriage equality" come out of his mouth, I'll just go with his last statement, that "God's in the mix."
emulatorloo
(44,183 posts)Obama justice dept refuses to enforce DOMA
Obama push to successfully end DADT. Repealing DOMA apparently next on the agenda.
No Obama push to stop marriage equality in states that have it.
He's been consistent in opposing attempts to limit the rights of same-sex couples.
So no, Obama is not "the same" as Stacey Campfield.
Yes Obama should come out with a strong statement for marriage equality.
But claims that he is the same as Campfield are silly.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Repealing DOMA does *not* legalize gay marriage where it is currently illegal.
And while Obama is not as bad as Campfield, until he retracts his previous statement opposing gay marriage I will not give him a pass on this issue.
emulatorloo
(44,183 posts)I am irritated as hell that he will not make a strong positive statement in support of marriage equality.
However as you well know actions are louder than words. Obama's actions have consistently been in support of equal rights for gays, including full partnership rights for same-sex couples.
I have heard other politicians make similar statements about their religious beliefs about marriage. The difference is that most of those politicians follow through with egregious policy proposals and anti-gay legislation.
Obama is not the first person to have his thinking fucked up by religion. However, If you cannot distinguish between Obama's actions and views on gay rights as a whole, and Campbell's actions and views on gay rights, this is a problem with your thinking.
That's what my Mom used to call cutting your nose off to spite your face.
It isn't that "Obama is not as bad as Campfield" as you said.
It is that Campfield and his ilk are the mortal enemies of GLBT. While Obama is one of GLBT's allies, despite the his dumb/muddled statements on marriage equality.
Additionally the "god is in the mix" statement isn't the last word.
TIMELINE: Tracking Barack Obamas Position On Marriage Equality
By Zack Ford on Jun 22, 2011 at 1:20 pm ThinkProgress
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/06/22/250931/timeline-barack-obama-marriage-equality/
I am ready for him to fucking evolve his thinking already. Everybody who wants to get married should have the right to marry.
P.S. I know what DOMA is.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But I think it would be awesome if a gay-owned restaurant refused him entry, or a gay waiter refused to serve him, because of his opposition to gay marriage. I would like to think that this might shock him into doing the right thing.
emulatorloo
(44,183 posts)No disagreement from me on that.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,093 posts)...I will certainly make it a point to have at least one meal at the Bistro on the Bijou.
Bruce Wayne
(692 posts)"Sorry, homophobes. We don't serve your kind here."
DonRedwood
(4,359 posts)NEVER make your waiter/waitress mad!! I worked with this guy who would spit in food of customers he didn't like. He was especially horrible to return customers who were bad tippers or rude.
I'll admit, I'm SUPER nice to restaurant staff now, out of fear! Please don't spit in my food!
(I do not condone spitting in people's food, have never done it and I hope nobody has done it to me!!)
Rex
(65,616 posts)to anyone they want.
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)But think of the outcry here if the roles are reversed.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)there would be an outcry if the roles were reversed.
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)But I think you are missing the point. Should we be celebrating exclusionary tactics like this? If we don't want certain groups discriminated against, should we be applauding when others are?
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I often discriminate against hate groups, enablers of hate groups, racists, Klan members and homophobes-- they're bad for business, it's perfectly legal, and I'm ethically justified.
Unless of course you believe Mildred Loving (ne: Loving v. Virginia) should openly embrace members of the Klan who happened to walk into her neighborhood....?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)against.
Not sure why that's such a mystery to you. Are you in FAVOR of discrimination or bigotry against gay people?
Rex
(65,616 posts)Bluerthanblue
(13,669 posts)she asked him to leave because of his public statements against 'certain groups' and his spreading mis-information about HIV- AIDS. She said she considered him a bully.
That is perfectly acceptable. He, individually was refused service because his own words and actions. There is a difference imo.
there's a statement from the owner further down on the thread which is worth seeing.
Shouldn't there be an outcry when a business owner of public accommodation refuses service based on sexual orientation?
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)Would you want a heterosexual supporter of equal access to marriage be refused service?
_ed_
(1,734 posts)I have no idea what you're getting at.
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)This guy was refused service based on his beliefs. Should liberals be denied service based on their beliefs? Would you applaud as loudly if Sanders was not allowed to dine at a restaurant owned by a conservative?
_ed_
(1,734 posts)You have the right to refuse service for a number of reasons. They don't include things like sex or race. They do include things like: "no shirt no shoes no service."
This merchant is keeping bigoted, stupid people out of his restaurant. Being a stupid fucking bigot is not a protected class under American jurisprudence.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Which people are the liberals hurting with their beliefs?
Which liberals are out there spreading this DEADLY LIE: "its virtually impossible to spread HIV/AIDS through heterosexual sex."
When a person spreads DANGEROUS LIES that could literally kill people, I believe it's a private business owners right to not allow those lies to be spread or endorsed in their place of business.
I understand the point and any business owner who wants to not allow "liberals" in their establishment can go ahead and do so. All that does is tell me where not to spend my money.
At some point a line must be drawn. This business found their line.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)clear on that. There's no protection from the logical consequences of idiot speech.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)It happens all the time, with no legal recourse.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Yes. Of course there should be an outcry when a business owner refuses services based on sexual orientation.
But the owner isn't discriminating against anyone for their sexual orientation-- they are however, discriminating against someone for being a small-minded, half-educated, sub-literate, knuckle-dragging bigot-- which is of course, completely legal...
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)Sometimes things really are that simple.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Today's Special:
Fried Chicken,
Crispy Chicken Livers,
No Stacey.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I've always got a few giant hockers that I could use to season his food and I'm sure the cooks wouldn't think twice of dropping his food on the floor before serving! And the Bartender creating his drinks would probably use their special Bar Rag mixer to create his drinks.
"Floor spice makes it all extra nice."
I remember those days.
K Gardner
(14,933 posts)highplainsdem
(49,036 posts)Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)Fuckers like that need to have their asses kicked to the curb everywhere... Including their job.
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)If it's OK for one group to do it, it's OK for the other.
Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)In fact... I would be more then fine with that.
Ohio Joe
(21,761 posts)I got their email from their website, it is:
bistroatthebijou@bellsouth.net
http://www.thebistroatthebijou.com/
Send them a nice Thank You note!
Found in Yonkers
(100 posts)Stacey is a GIRL's name, Senator!
white_wolf
(6,238 posts)Anyone who is willing to stand up for equal rights gets my support. My dad likes to take the family out to breakfast on the weekends to spend time with his grandkids, I'll have to suggest this place, if it isn't too expensive that is.
usrname
(398 posts)even Tennesseans think you're a douche bag.
idiotgardener
(509 posts)Do you see anything "douchey" about insulting an entire state, including the Tennessee DUers here?
usrname
(398 posts)Yes, I feel perfectly justified in lumping tennesseans among the red-state tea-partying blowhards. You have to earn your liberalness.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)me to
ingac70
(7,947 posts)This state is over run with douchebags.
Response to highplainsdem (Original post)
Obamanaut This message was self-deleted by its author.
47of74
(18,470 posts)I shall make it a point to have a meal at that place.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)is for people of good conscience to remain silent"
It is good to see that some people choose not to remain silent. K&R
earthbone
(89 posts)but did they not set themselves up for a lawsuit?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)steven johnson
(1,772 posts)Putting all of the HIV ills on one group negatates the role of the Reagan Administration's "lack of leadership" on the disease "significantly hindered" HIV/AIDS research and prevention efforts.
Let he who is without fault cast the first stone.
[link:http://www.thebody.com/content/art10329.html|
Enrique
(27,461 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)you're dealing with an outstanding human being. I salute you, Ms. Boggs.