We are rapidly approaching the point of 'thoughtcrime'

[Droogie]

It isn't polite to discuss religion or politics because it alienates anyone who doesn't agree with your positions. As a business owner, alienating customers is bad business.

 

[jamil]

It isn't polite to discuss religion or politics because it alienates anyone who doesn't agree with your positions. As a business owner, alienating customers is bad business.

That's a quality post.

 

[BogWalker]

Not shopping at anti-gun businesses is a big difference from shopping there and then being offended after you've already completed your purchase. When Dicks pulled all of the ARs off of their shelves I didn't pack up everything I'd every bought there and demand a refund for all of it; I just quit shopping there to express my discontent.

The jeweler did nothing wrong. He didn't wrongly deny services; he didn't discriminate. He stated a political opinion. He practiced his First Amendment rights, and the mob (and some of INGO) wants to string him up for it. If you don't like his opinions don't shop there.

He could have denied the refund, but the legal fees after the inevitable lawsuits would have been unbearable.

 

[oldpink]

Is that why many here won't patronize businesses they consider anti-gun? Just a hissy fit?

There's a massive difference between refusing to patronize a business because of their positions and making a purchase from a business and returning to demand a refund because of something you learned about said business after the fact.

 

[halfmileharry]

Libtards. 'Nuff said.

Newfoundland and Labrador? Bleh, except for the dogs, they got nuthin'...

I don't know man....Pretty darn good bear hunting in Newfoundland.

 

[MisterChester]

How were they mistreated? Your knee seems to be a little jerky.

I am not talking about this particular incident. I'm referring to the post I quoted. It wasn't very well thought out, as it lumped all LGBT people as whiners. People here would whine too if someone came along and said "I'm sick of hearing gun nuts whine! Go play in traffic!"

 

[oldpink]

I am not talking about this particular incident. I'm referring to the post I quoted. It wasn't very well thought out, as it lumped all LGBT people as whiners. People here would whine too if someone came along and said "I'm sick of hearing gun nuts whine! Go play in traffic!"

You might have a point if you could site an example of a gun nut going back to a business and demanding a refund after having made a purchase there because he learned something about said business's opinions after the fact.
...or if a gun nut attempted to use government/lawyers to harm a business for having committed the crime of disagreeing with him.
...or...
No, if we find out something about a business that we dislike (anti 2A, etc.), we just don't go there, and we may ask our friends to follow suit.
That's why I buy Wranglers and not Levi's.

 

[Cerberus]

I am not talking about this particular incident. I'm referring to the post I quoted. It wasn't very well thought out, as it lumped all LGBT people as whiners. People here would whine too if someone came along and said "I'm sick of hearing gun nuts whine! Go play in traffic!"

What country were you living in until the recent upturn in gun owners' favor? I remember a good deal of this sentiment from past decades.

 

[poptab]

I am not talking about this particular incident. I'm referring to the post I quoted. It wasn't very well thought out, as it lumped all LGBT people as whiners. People here would whine too if someone came along and said "I'm sick of hearing gun nuts whine! Go play in traffic!"

Yea that wasn't very sensitive of me.

Oh well.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Not shopping at anti-gun businesses is a big difference from shopping there and then being offended after you've already completed your purchase. When Dicks pulled all of the ARs off of their shelves I didn't pack up everything I'd every bought there and demand a refund for all of it; I just quit shopping there to express my discontent.

The jeweler did nothing wrong. He didn't wrongly deny services; he didn't discriminate. He stated a political opinion. He practiced his First Amendment rights, and the mob (and some of INGO) wants to string him up for it. If you don't like his opinions don't shop there.

He could have denied the refund, but the legal fees after the inevitable lawsuits would have been unbearable.

What lawsuit?

The first amendment protects you from government, not from consequences.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What I'm wondering, how did this become a public issue? Did some activist see the sign and seek out gays to complain about it? Did the gay couple sic the rainbow gestapo on the store owner? Did the store owner set this up to make a point? Someone made a stink about it. Someone politicized it and publicized it. That's the thing I oppose.

It's the day of social media and 24 hour news channels. There is no such thing as to petty to report and no telling what will go viral.

 

[cobber]

It's the day of social media and 24 hour news channels. There is no such thing as to petty to report and no telling what will go viral.

Anything involving LGBT and Christians espousing 'traditional values' will go on the social media.


Considering LGBT is 1-2% of the population, they get more social media time than chupucabras. Not sure how that became the new 'civil rights' movement...

 

[BogWalker]

What lawsuit?

The first amendment protects you from government, not from consequences.

No lawsuit now. Considering how similar situations of business being at odds with the LGBT community I imagine there would have been if the business owner hadn't agreed to the refund.

 

[miguel]

What in that prohibits asking for a refund? Asking.

If someone buys something that can be resold, like a shovel, patio furniture, a couch, then I don't see anything wrong with a refund. I think refunds have helped increase sales for businesses, since people know they can take it back and are more likely to take a chance on a product. Hell, Mrs. Miguel at any one point in time probably has $100 in receipts with her that are potential return items!

The story seemed to indicate the jeweler was doing custom work, requested by the happy couple. What I couldn't tell from the story, and I apologize if I missed it, was how far along the guy had gotten with the work. So, if he hadn't started making the ring yet, and they want a refund, they should go for it. If they were otherwise happy with the experience, I think it's a little whack to return it, but that's their call.

My concern (and maybe assumption?) was that they ordered custom work and he had started to create the piece(s) for them. At that point, I think he's owed for his time, at least. Might be a hard sell if he's already made it and then has to sell the "lesbian rings" to a Baptist couple who comes in the following week.

Certain things are non-refundable in many industries and I would like to think custom jewelry would be one. For example, most sports equipment companies (like Dicks, Sports Authority, etc.) won't take jocks back. Maybe a better example would be customized sports equipment like ice skates, shoes or a lacrosse stick.

p.s. I tried to rep you for a fair question but I apparently repped you for something else the other day, so I will give you "honorary" rep for asking me to clarify.

 

[BugI02]

Agreed. If the rings are 'tainted' then have someone else melt them down and re-use the metal. Surely the matal isn't/can't be tainted.

 

[miguel]

The jeweler did nothing wrong. He didn't wrongly deny services; he didn't discriminate. He stated a political opinion. He practiced his First Amendment rights, and the mob (and some of INGO) wants to string him up for it. If you don't like his opinions don't shop there.

Not busting your chops, but since it was in Canada, they don't have the 1A. They have to do what the queen says!

Agreed. If the rings are 'tainted' then have someone else melt them down and re-use the metal. Surely the matal isn't/can't be tainted.

I don't know I'd go so far as to consider them tainted, but if someone is buying a wedding ring and says, "Hey, this design is unlike any other in the store. What's up with that?" there will likely be a subset of people who would pass if they heard the backstory on them. I'm sure a small number, but the proprietor is on the hook for custom work.

 

[BugI02]

My favorite part of the article is this: "The couple now believes the rings they ordered have been tainted by having been fashioned by jeweler Esau Jardon's hands"

Not my phrasing. I read it on INGO so it must be true

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If someone buys something that can be resold, like a shovel, patio furniture, a couch, then I don't see anything wrong with a refund. I think refunds have helped increase sales for businesses, since people know they can take it back and are more likely to take a chance on a product. Hell, Mrs. Miguel at any one point in time probably has $100 in receipts with her that are potential return items!

The story seemed to indicate the jeweler was doing custom work, requested by the happy couple. What I couldn't tell from the story, and I apologize if I missed it, was how far along the guy had gotten with the work. So, if he hadn't started making the ring yet, and they want a refund, they should go for it. If they were otherwise happy with the experience, I think it's a little whack to return it, but that's their call.

My concern (and maybe assumption?) was that they ordered custom work and he had started to create the piece(s) for them. At that point, I think he's owed for his time, at least. Might be a hard sell if he's already made it and then has to sell the "lesbian rings" to a Baptist couple who comes in the following week.

Certain things are non-refundable in many industries and I would like to think custom jewelry would be one. For example, most sports equipment companies (like Dicks, Sports Authority, etc.) won't take jocks back. Maybe a better example would be customized sports equipment like ice skates, shoes or a lacrosse stick.

p.s. I tried to rep you for a fair question but I apparently repped you for something else the other day, so I will give you "honorary" rep for asking me to clarify.

Sure. But they asked, right? No one forced him to honor the request. He made the business decision to do so.

When you are buying rings you are buying symbolism. Else you'd just give the person the cash. I can understand the "taint" for the symbol.

 

[oldpink]

Sure. But they asked, right? No one forced him to honor the request. He made the business decision to do so.

When you are buying rings you are buying symbolism. Else you'd just give the person the cash. I can understand the "taint" for the symbol.

If these particular activists can understand the "taint" with their purchase and demand a refund for said taint, why are people of similar mindset absolutely hellbent on forcing other businesses (Memories Pizza, anyone?) to provide them a service even more intimately intertwined with their lifestyle?
They can't have it both ways.
Oh wait, this is a newly minted protected class, thus exempt from consistency.

 

[miguel]

Sure. But they asked, right? No one forced him to honor the request. He made the business decision to do so.

When you are buying rings you are buying symbolism. Else you'd just give the person the cash. I can understand the "taint" for the symbol.

Yeah, for sure. But he's damned if he did refund or if he hadn't. Hearts were still broken, which is the ultimate crime he's got to wear the scarlet letter for.