Restaurants Are Not Your Slaves: They Can Serve Whom They Want

The other weekend I told my wife that we would let the children eat pizza at home while we went to restaurant without them. We had good food; but, more importantly, we had some quiet atmosphere. I love my children but I wanted a couple of hours alone with my spouse.

Was I sinning by committing such discrimination?

If you are sane and realize that I had the right to make that choice and dine without children, then how can that same right be denied to someone who owns a restaurant? The Huffington Post reported on the objection to a restaurant banning young kids after 7pm: “This is discrimination!!!!” The HuffPo’s response reflects the surreal Federal legal culture that our society is under.

“But is it? Under federal law, businesses reserve the right to refuse children. The Civil Rights Act, which makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion and race, does not include any mention of children.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: The ‘Science’ Behind Michelle Obama’s Hated School Lunch Rules Ends Up Being a Fraud

OK, if a restaurant is refusing some people as customers and allowing other people, that is the definition of “discrimination.” It is discriminating against one set of people and in favor of another.

The HuffPo is right that such discrimination is not a Federal crime. But, even as the article explains the fact, it treats “discrimination” as a word that only refers to a crime.

That same confusion encourages people to lobby to ban restaurants from having this freedom and to believe they are virtuous for doing so.

Restaurants have expenses and liabilities that are involved in their need to sell their services to paying customers. They are already taking a risk by offending potential customers by their rules. People might decide to never eat there because of a rule banning kids in the evening. The fact that restaurants are taking that risk indicates that they are experiencing liabilities in having today’s children in their area of business (Watch the video!). Other adult customers are complaining about having their dinner ruined.

But even if the restaurants are doing wrong, the proper response is to boycott them, not use the government to dictate whom they serve.

We’re supposed to be a free society, remember? People have the freedom of association and the freedom to trade services with one another. If anyone respected the Bible as a guide for civil policy, they would notice that the freedoms that are dangerous to society are the violations of vows that undermine marriage and marital fidelity. In America now, the only freedoms left seem to be the freedom to cheat and abandon one’s spouse. Everything else is regulated.

The bottom line for restaurants is that the owners of a business should be just as free to decide whether or not to engage you as a customer as you are free to decide whether or not you wish to engage in their services.

Anything else is slavery.

Previous Obamacare: $1 Pay Raise Costs Middle Class Family $9,355 in Premiums
Next Charges Filed In Benghazi Deaths But Not Against Clinton, Panetta Or Obama


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.