Reactionary Radical Eliminationists vs. Trans

If you're a rambunctious loudmouth at a fancy restaurant, they can toss you out.
Been that way for ages.

That's private property, and 100% legitimate.
Just as it would be to demand you use the bathroom that matches your biology.

No one is infringing on your rights.
If you ever meet Blu Del Barrio at a convention, feel free to call them "she".
You're free to.
You're also a jerk.

I agree.

If one chooses to be different from others in the society in which they live, then they should be willing to accept that they will always be on the fringes of society.

HOWEVER…, however, that does NOT give licence to assholes to harass and bully those who are different.

THAT is the purpose of the law. To protect individuals.

Then you can stop bawling over Disney tossing Gina Carano into the Christian movie bin.

Bathrooms are adjudicated under the law, I'm afraid. Private opinions play no part in that.

Sure I could. And it's as likely as you filling out a job application today.

Then the law is wrong, and rights ARE being infringed upon.

Really? We never knew this about you.
Shocking.

I have a feeling you wouldn't feel that way if you were being told you couldn't use the bathroom because you're a welder and welders are inherently dirty.
Which I have been told, albeit for being a landscaper.

Fine, we don't give a shit if your feelings are hurt by expecting you to be nice to folks.

If it was someone's private property, I would leave and never give them money. I would also think they were jerks, as instructed.

Your expectations carry no consequences, so knock yourself out.

See, awful is freedom.
If you're not awful, you're not free enough.
Or else, the freedom of the awful trickles down on the non-awful.
Even though history (both globally, and on this very board) shows its never worked that way.

And if Albert owned that restaurant he would defend his right to throw you out for your speech with all his passion because property rights.

heh-he'd still be arguing for the "right" to choose who he serves.

Those lunch counters were on private property too...

And what's the problem with that? You piss off the owner, you become a trespasser. You can still speak all you want outside, on the public sidewalk.

That's not an argument. It's an observation of FACTS.

Fun idea for the mods/admins-

Put UA's whole posting record into one big thread called "UA island" then lock it.

that as a restaurateur you'd arbitrarily turf folks based on your own prejudices?
Yes, I suppose it is an observation, but thanks for confirming it as a fact.

I said I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, and that is a fact.

As for who I would refuse, that would be anyone who annoys me. My single-occupancy bathrooms won't be an issue.

Everyone, go to UA's restaurant with a dogshit-fake Scottish accent, and loudly whine about woke movies, and women.
Not only won't that annoy him, it'll be like you have a Predator cloak on.
You'll be good to go.
Unless you order a latte.
Then he'll hear a high pitch ringing in his head that'll make him double over, and puke blood.

Remember when UA the imaginary business owner reserved the right to fire his employees for not having sex with him? Good times.

whirz ma ootmilk, ya wee bitch?

This would be great, except @Uncle Albert will never own a business. Ths is why he is so mad. He wants businesses to throw out trans people and out them because it is not being done. Aside from a walmart where the management and security was fired, I have not been thrown out of any business. I have refused to go into drunken country western klereyoke night in an AL dive bar, but I figured that would have been torture on multiple levels.

It just is not happening, and he really wishes it would happen. Meanwhile, with all his prejudices he would be the only person allowed in his place of business, and no one would want to go there. Take one look at that beard and the critters and dingleberries in it and you wouldn't eat in his establishment. Seriously, if I saw him in a booth I would leave immediately as that is just nasty.

Lol that UA is in here giving arguments that were rejected back in the "should a restaurant be allowed to refuse black customers" days.

UA watches as his local diner is forced to take down their "No Blacks, No Jews, No Irish" sign, shaking in impotent rate at this brutal violation of their property rights.

Banning Irish people is understandable, though. If I ever own a business, they need not apply. Bunch of rock kissing potato farmers.

"Everyone" but HIM, of course, because he would have to actually leave the house and look someone in the eye to carry out his little subversive performance art routine.