Atheist files complaint over restaurant's Sunday promotion

Curious George · Jul 21, 2012

sojourner said:
In this case though, religion is only incidental to the issue. The issue is that the restaurant wants to boost business for Sunday noon. so they offer incentive to groups who happen to be most likely to be out on Sunday noon. The fact that those people are church goers is incidental and not the reason. If Jews were out at that time, they'd be offering them a discount. If students were out at that time, they'd be offering them a discount. And the fact remains that anyone -- religious or not -- can obtain a church bulletin easily.

Perhaps you miss my point, When one group is offered "incidental" privilege, then the discrimination is not blatant it is systemic. This type of discrimination is not anymore legal.

Curious George · Jul 21, 2012

Willamena said:
It's not politically correct. That doesn't mean it's derogatory.

For one whom civil rights are paramount, I would think you should understand that the term is in fact derogatory. You can take my word for it, research why, or simply ask me to explain.

Curious George · Jul 21, 2012

sojourner said:
No, it's not, because, as I said, if Jews were out on Sunday at noon, they'd be the ones getting the discount -- not Xtians. It has everything to do targeting a group likely to be out on Sunday noon, not a specific religious group.

If this were the case, why then are there not other promotions specifically catered to other religions on days and times of their worship? Are you also suggesting that Jews and other religions cannot be out on Sunday at noon?

Willamena · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
For one whom civil rights are paramount, I would think you should understand that the term is in fact derogatory. You can take my word for it, research why, or simply ask me to explain.

I feel that it's because I understand human rights that I can say it's not derogatory. The one has nothing to do with the other.

Would you please explain?

CaptainXeroid · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
No, a business should not be able to hold any promotion that they want.

Then we will have to agree to disagree because you are wrong.

. I'm guessing you favor a nanny state in which government should dictate how people do business. I believe in free enterprise and the power of the market place to reward businesses that serve the public and put those out of business that do not. You should research how well that system works.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

CaptainXeroid said:
Then we will have to agree to disagree because you are wrong.. I'm guessing you favor a nanny state in which government should dictate how people do business. I believe in free enterprise and the power of the market place to reward businesses that serve the public and put those out of business that do not. You should research how well that system works.

I have. We could surely debate the type of systems of which you are in favor. Start a thread and test my research.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

Willamena said:
I feel that it's because I understand human rights that I can say it's not derogatory. The one has nothing to do with the other.

Would you please explain?

First let us agree on meanings. Hopefully, Dictionary.com is an acceptable source to start.

Dictionary.com said:
Derogatory-adjective tending to lessen the merit or reputation of a person or thing; disparaging; depreciatory: a derogatory remark.

Now let us decide if the term handicapped person tends to lessen the reputation of a person or thing. Firstly we can notice the use of the word Handicap, this term carries with it much baggage from the early 1900's of how we as a society treated people who had disabilities. Next, we can move to question the fact that instead of noting that the person had a disability we grouped them together with language which focuses on the disability. Granted, one might say "that is just political correctness, people first language does not affect how we view a person." I would disagree. words are powerful and even the order which they are spoke affects our perception.

This source is Wikipedia and I understand that it is not a scholarly one, if you insist I will try to dig up scholarly one's in its stead.

People-first language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You know, if I made a remark and you told me it was derogatory I do not know that I would be so quick to dismiss your claim. Generally speaking, people with disabilities find the phrase handicapped person demoralizing and derogatory. That alone should count for something.

Willamena · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
Now let us decide if the term handicapped person tends to lessen the reputation of a person or thing. Firstly we can notice the use of the word Handicap, this term carries with it much baggage from the early 1900's of how we as a society treated people who had disabilities. Next, we can move to question the fact that instead of noting that the person had a disability we grouped them together with language which focuses on the disability. Granted, one might say "that is just political correctness, people first language does not affect how we view a person." I would disagree. words are powerful and even the order which they are spoke affects our perception.

All of this rhetoric lends itself to politics, honey. You'd make a great politican.

Curious George said:
This source is Wikipedia and I understand that it is not a scholarly one, if you insist I will try to dig up scholarly one's in its stead.

People-first language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You know, if I made a remark and you told me it was derogatory I do not know that I would be so quick to dismiss your claim. Generally speaking, people with disabilities find the phrase handicapped person demoralizing and derogatory. That alone should count for something.

A well-made argument. I'll be more politically correct in the future.

Mr Spinkles · Jul 22, 2012

sojourner said:
Don't make the law into something it wasn't intended to be.

Er, I'm not. I'm quoting the law word for word.

sojourner said:
Again: If muslims or hindi were likely to be out on Sunday noon, they'd be offered the discount. What's happening is that the restauranteur is targeting a group based upon proximity and likelihood of availability at a certain time -- not based upon religion. Your family is not included, because it hasn't been identified as part of a group that's usually available at that time. I'd wager, in fact, that most folks who don't go to church are less likely to be available at that time than those who do go to church.

The most efficient and direct way to attract people who are out on Sunday noon is to offer a discount for people who are out on Sunday noon. That is typically how discounts work at every restaurant I have been to. Please explain how excluding some of the customers you want to attract, i.e. non-churchgoers, is more advantageous.

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
If this were the case, why then are there not other promotions specifically catered to other religions on days and times of their worship? Are you also suggesting that Jews and other religions cannot be out on Sunday at noon?

Apparently, business is understandably slow Sunday noon. Business is understandably better on Friday evening.

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

The most efficient and direct way to attract people who are out on Sunday noon is to offer a discount for people who are out on Sunday noon.

Isn't that what the restaurant did? Churchgoers are, apparently, the group most likely to be out on Sunday noon. hence, the bulletin discount.
So glad we agree.

Please explain how excluding some of the customers you want to attract, i.e. non-churchgoers, is more advantageous.

How are they excluding them? These folks are still welcome to come in and get a meal at the regular price, just like everyone else.

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

Perhaps you miss my point, When one group is offered "incidental" privilege, then the discrimination is not blatant it is systemic.

If you're hinting that atheists are being "systematically discriminated against," you're deluding yourself.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

sojourner said:
If you're hinting that atheists are being "systematically discriminated against," you're deluding yourself.

No, actually I wouldn't suggest that. I would suggest that all religious people except Christians are being systemically discriminated against. But were I to suggest that Atheists were being systemically discriminated against, why would I be deluding myself? A business that is open to the public is giving preference to a specific class of customers. Were I to own a bus and give preference to a certain group, say allow those with church bulletins to sit in the front of the bus while those without had to sit in the back would that not be discrimination?

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

I would suggest that all religious people except Christians are being systemically discriminated against.

How? Because they happen to not have worship at a low-census time?

A business that is open to the public is giving preference to a specific class of customers.

class of customers? I'd hardly identify "people who are likely to out during a low-census time" as a "class." Seems more like a "demographic" to me.

Were I to own a bus and give preference to a certain group, say allow those with church bulletins to sit in the front of the bus while those without had to sit in the back would that not be discrimination?

for what possible reason would you do that? That tactic wouldn't boost your business any. However, if you offered a discount to Jews on Friday evenings (who are going to synagogue and can't drive), then that might boost your business, especially if your bus route coincided with arriving at the synagogue at the appropriate time. But would that be discrimination? No, because you're also allowing all other people to ride your bus at the regular, posted rate.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

sojourner said:
How? Because they happen to not have worship at a low-census time?

class of customers? I'd hardly identify "people who are likely to out during a low-census time" as a "class." Seems more like a "demographic" to me.

for what possible reason would you do that? That tactic wouldn't boost your business any. However, if you offered a discount to Jews on Friday evenings (who are going to synagogue and can't drive), then that might boost your business, especially if your bus route coincided with arriving at the synagogue at the appropriate time. But would that be discrimination? No, because you're also allowing all other people to ride your bus at the regular, posted rate.

Yes, that would still be discrimination. Perhaps there is a miscommunication here. What do you think discrimination is?

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
Yes, that would still be discrimination. Perhaps there is a miscommunication here. What do you think discrimination is?

For purposes of this discussion, I would have to say that discrimination would entail always giving a certain class of people a preferential discount to the exclusion of other classes. But that's not happening here. Churchgoers aren't always afforded a discount -- just on Sunday noon. At other times, they pay regular price. I think this is especially true since other demographics are also given specific discounts at specific times and not at other times. the restaurant isn't raising prices for everyone else, or withholding service.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

sojourner said:
For purposes of this discussion, I would have to say that discrimination would entail always giving a certain class of people a preferential discount to the exclusion of other classes. But that's not happening here. Churchgoers aren't always afforded a discount -- just on Sunday noon. At other times, they pay regular price. I think this is especially true since other demographics are also given specific discounts at specific times and not at other times. the restaurant isn't raising prices for everyone else, or withholding service.

No I meant definition of discrimination- not in this case but a definition that is used to judge all cases.

sojourner · Jul 22, 2012

Curious George said:
No I meant definition of discrimination- not in this case but a definition that is used to judge all cases.

Not sure there is one.

Willamena · Jul 22, 2012

Restaurant and retail discounts are not "systematic discrimination." Bring in your coupon.

Curious George · Jul 22, 2012

could we use this one

http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/discrimination/ said:
Discrimination refers to the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.

Atheist files complaint over restaurant's Sunday promotion

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Just me

Following Christ

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Just me

Mr

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Just me

Veteran Member