lazycrockett said:

CNN had a story bout this and the women who posted the sign bout screaming children will not be tolerated stated that her business has boomed in the last year. That people will go out of there way to find her eatery and enjoy their meal. So there are a huge amount of people who want enjoy a nice quiet meal without junior throwing his peas at the window.

Was there anyone here that said they felt that was acceptable, or felt others should put up with that?

lazycrockett said:

CNN had a story bout this and the women who posted the sign bout screaming children will not be tolerated stated that her business has boomed in the last year. That people will go out of there way to find her eatery and enjoy their meal. So there are a huge amount of people who want enjoy a nice quiet meal without junior throwing his peas at the window.

The people in that town like the idea overwhlemingly .... if there are enough choices for families to eat elsewhere I don't see the problem.

People with young children will just allow another business in that area to get more business.

SUPRMAN said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

Right....

Well I'm gonna continue with my "no whites" restaurant.

I thought it was no white children?

You can have a "no whites" restaurant.

It just can't be open to the general public.

I meant no white children.

They also mentioned that this McDain's is located in the middle of a golf course??? and only seats bout 40 people so it seems to have been pretty much a non story till the media got a hold of it.

N looking at the website the place is obviously Not for Kids.

[Edited 7/13/11 20:43pm]

JustErin said:

lazycrockett said:

CNN had a story bout this and the women who posted the sign bout screaming children will not be tolerated stated that her business has boomed in the last year. That people will go out of there way to find her eatery and enjoy their meal. So there are a huge amount of people who want enjoy a nice quiet meal without junior throwing his peas at the window.

Was there anyone here that said they felt that was acceptable, or felt others should put up with that?

The point is that we DO have to put up with it. Why is that so hard to understand?

paintedlady said:

lazycrockett said:

CNN had a story bout this and the women who posted the sign bout screaming children will not be tolerated stated that her business has boomed in the last year. That people will go out of there way to find her eatery and enjoy their meal. So there are a huge amount of people who want enjoy a nice quiet meal without junior throwing his peas at the window.

The people in that town like the idea overwhlemingly .... if there are enough choices for families to eat elsewhere I don't see the problem.

People with young children will just allow another business in that area to get more business.

Which is a win-win.

Cerebus said:

JustErin said:

Was there anyone here that said they felt that was acceptable, or felt others should put up with that?

The point is that we DO have to put up with it. Why is that so hard to understand?

If you're going to a restaurant that allows disruptive behaviour after they receive a complaint from other patrons, you're eating at a shitty place.

Anytime I've been anywhere and someone has been disruptive and complaints are made - they are promptly escorted out if the behaviour doesn't stop.

SUPRMAN said:

paintedlady said:

The people in that town like the idea overwhlemingly .... if there are enough choices for families to eat elsewhere I don't see the problem.

People with young children will just allow another business in that area to get more business.

Which is a win-win.

A smart competitor would post a huge sign... " Kids welcomed here!" $$$$$

SUPRMAN said:

Cerebus said:

And another thing, fuck all y'alls kids! Everybody who has kids thinks they're perfect, or at the very least that they're not as bad as those "other kids". You're wrong. Anybody who doesn't want kids and find their behavior intolerable if FORCED to put up with their bullshit. There is no argument for this, its a simple fact. Unless you are going to one of the very few adults only establishments (and I'm not talking about bars or strip clubs) you are FORCED, without choice, to deal with obnoxious children.

Now, as far as the legality of this guys decision, I hope it goes all the way to the supreme court and he wins.

Who is suing him? On what grounds?

You don't have a case merely because your child can't eat at his restaurant.

Oh I don't know that anybody is, yet. But I'm sure somebody will try now that the story has received so much exposure. The statement was just more of a way to show my support for establishments like this. I'm completely amazed that so many people seem to think this isn't actually an issue. I'd be more than willing to bet (which I don't do) that at least 95% of them have kids.

Also, if the restaraunt had opened as adults only, would we even be having this conversation? I applaud the move to make their customer base more happy. I hope more people follow their lead as I will most definitely support them (with my wallet).

^As someone who works in the service industry I can tell you which kind of place I would rather work at. Cause Im a waiter/bartender, not a baby sitter.

[Edited 7/13/11 20:50pm]

JustErin said:

Cerebus said:

The point is that we DO have to put up with it. Why is that so hard to understand?

If you're going to a restaurant that allows disruptive behaviour after they receive a complaint from other patrons, you're eating at a shitty place.

Anytime I've been anywhere and someone has been disruptive and complaints are made - they are promptly escorted out if the behaviour doesn't stop.

We're not talking about going to a restaraunt that allows or disallows ANY kind of behavior. We're talking about them not allowing kids under a certain age because, for whatever reason, their parents can't seem to keep them under control or have enough common courtesy to get up and take them outside when they're acting out.

When have you EVER seen a child promptly escorted out of any establishment? I've complained about loud children, crying children, misbehaving childred and been told that there is nothing they can do short of kick out the whole family, followed by being told they're not willing to do that. I've seen other people complain and watched as nothing happens. In a grocery store, a record store, clothing store, etc etc etc, NOBODY says ANYTHING. I was in Safeway not that long ago and a child was screaming at the top of his longs for 15 minutes. I thought he was saying, "I wanna diiiiie!!!!!!" Then, just my luck, he and his mother ended up in the checkout lane next to mine. The child was screaming, "I want a tooooyyyyy!!!!" Snot running over his mouth, tears running down his cheeks, his mother on her cell phone. I was in a two Barnes & Noble in an upscale neighborhood a few months ago when three children were running around playing tag. One of them tried to run around behind me to hide and said very forcefully, "Do not touch me". The kid looked at me like I was satan and ran the other direction. I watched them as the went the other direction, and then downstairs. I went to checkout shortly after and the parent they were with was NEVER even on the second floor. She was on the first floor the entire time. I could go on and on and on and on. I deal with this kind of stuff ALL THE TIME. Most of the people I know who have kids, even my closest and dearest friends, laugh at me and say some bullshit nonsense about how its just "kids being kids". Bullllllshit! Its bad parenting.

This is not an uncommon occerance. I see it all the time. And more often than not these days proprietors are too afraid to do or say anything because they may loose customers or get sued. Again, I applaud this restaraunt for taking these steps and hope more will follow.

Don't get me wrong. Kid appropriate place, fine. I hike 'em up and deal with it. No complaints. But there are public places that are not meant to be a playground. There are expected societal norms that should be followed, even by children. If they can't meet them then they shouldn't be there.

lazycrockett said:

^As someone who works in the service industry I can tell you which kind of place I would rather work at. Cause Im a waiter/bartender, not a baby sitter.

EXACTLY my point. The world is not their babysitter. But more and more, that's the way it feels.

^I blame Whitney Houston and that "children are our future" bullshit.

lazycrockett said:

^As someone who works in the service industry I can tell you which kind of place I would rather work at. Cause Im a waiter/bartender, not a baby sitter.

[Edited 7/13/11 20:50pm]

You are so hot to me right now.

[img:$uid]http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i9/jgascot/gifs/MarieFaintingGif.gif[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Lazycrockett/marieosmond.jpg[/img:$uid]

lazycrockett said:

[img:$uid]http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Lazycrockett/marieosmond.jpg[/img:$uid]

H.O.T.

lazycrockett said:

[img:$uid]http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Lazycrockett/marieosmond.jpg[/img:$uid]

FTW?!?! (and that's fuck the what?! btw, definitely NOT for the win)

JustErin said:

Cerebus said:

The point is that we DO have to put up with it. Why is that so hard to understand?

If you're going to a restaurant that allows disruptive behaviour after they receive a complaint from other patrons, you're eating at a shitty place.

Anytime I've been anywhere and someone has been disruptive and complaints are made - they are promptly escorted out if the behaviour doesn't stop.

the act of being required to signal for management and complain about another diner's children is enough to destroy the restaurant experience entirely.

who wants to HAVE to complain about unruly children when they are paying $$ for good food, drink and atmosphere?

smoothcriminal12 said:

SUPRMAN said:

I thought it was no white children?

You can have a "no whites" restaurant.

It just can't be open to the general public.

I meant no white children.

I still dont understand why the fuck people are throwing race into this... AGE DISCRIMINATION is EVERYWHERE! Its an AGE LIMIT....Christ...

And for those of you who think places remove children for unruly behaviour have obviously never been to walmart

And just because a child isnt bouncing off the walls doesnt meant they are not bothering other patrons... I was eating at a restaurant in a booth next to a lady, her mother, and her child obviously about 1 year old... The baby was making these awful noises and the other 2 thought it was cute and would nake the same fucking noise back at them.... Was be being naughty, No, but it was sooooooo irratating I almost started making the same loud noise back at them... who would of got kicked out... ME! Even tho i would of been making the same noise... If i were to walk into a restaurant, start babbling and making screaches and loud talking I would be asked to leave... Why is it any different that young children can get away with it....

yes, the baby is to young to understand that those noises are bothersome to ALL people, which is whyyyyyyyyyyyyy they wanna set an age limit... cuz kids under 5 or 6 dont know any better... Its not even about misbehaviour, its about noise...

.

[Edited 7/14/11 5:36am]

Cerebus said:

Shorty said:

no that was my impression of you. wahhhh wahhhh wahhhh! you sound like a tantruming brat yourself.

Again, why? Because I have an opinion different than yours? One that might actually make you think about yourself and how you look to other people? If you want to have a conversation you might try growing up a bit and actually writing something that matters. Your attempts to belittle me because I've made the effort to do so only makes you look exactly like the people I'm describing. Completely clueless as to how their actions affect those around them.

[Edited 7/13/11 15:29pm]

tinaz said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

I meant no white children.

I still dont understand why the fuck people are throwing race into this... AGE DISCRIMINATION is EVERYWHERE! Its an AGE LIMIT....Christ...

Did you get what I was trying to say though? Did you read what I was trying to imply? I'm saying that there's no difference between age discrimination and racism.

[Edited 7/14/11 6:09am]

smoothcriminal12 said:

tinaz said:

I still dont understand why the fuck people are throwing race into this... AGE DISCRIMINATION is EVERYWHERE! Its an AGE LIMIT....Christ...

Did you get what I was trying to say though? Did you read what I was trying to imply? I'm saying that there's no difference between age discrimination and racism.

[Edited 7/14/11 6:09am]

that is simply not true not at all. There is a huge legal difference. Age is NOT a protected class in this case. As far as I know the only times when age is a factor is in housing and employment. For employment it is for persons over 40, age can not be used. For housing in some cases there can be a minimum age to live in some places.

tinaz said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

I meant no white children.

I still dont understand why the fuck people are throwing race into this... AGE DISCRIMINATION is EVERYWHERE! Its an AGE LIMIT....Christ...

they do not understand the law.

smoothcriminal12 said:

tinaz said:

I still dont understand why the fuck people are throwing race into this... AGE DISCRIMINATION is EVERYWHERE! Its an AGE LIMIT....Christ...

Did you get what I was trying to say though? Did you read what I was trying to imply? I'm saying that there's no difference between age discrimination and racism.

[Edited 7/14/11 6:09am]

I get what your are trying imply yes, but you are taking it to the extreme, its not age discrimination... Its an age requirement, or limit... Its not saying NO CHILDREN EVER, its saying to eat here, you must be at least 6 years old... Bars have them, Hell, even in the mall they have a rule noone under 16 without a parent, Even as adults we have age restrictions... In housing, jobs, to get insurance's... None of this is discrimination against a person because of race and isnt even compareable...

tinaz said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

Did you get what I was trying to say though? Did you read what I was trying to imply? I'm saying that there's no difference between age discrimination and racism.

[Edited 7/14/11 6:09am]

I get what your are trying imply yes, but you are taking it to the extreme, its not age discrimination... Its an age requirement, or limit... Its not saying NO CHILDREN EVER, its saying to eat here, you must be at least 6 years old... Bars have them, Hell, even in the mall they have a rule noone under 16 without a parent, Even as adults we have age restrictions... In housing, jobs, to get insurance's... None of this is discrimination against a person because of race and isnt even compareable...

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

tinaz said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

Did you get what I was trying to say though? Did you read what I was trying to imply? I'm saying that there's no difference between age discrimination and racism.

[Edited 7/14/11 6:09am]

I get what your are trying imply yes, but you are taking it to the extreme, its not age discrimination... Its an age requirement, or limit... Its not saying NO CHILDREN EVER, its saying to eat here, you must be at least 6 years old... Bars have them, Hell, even in the mall they have a rule noone under 16 without a parent, Even as adults we have age restrictions... In housing, jobs, to get insurance's... None of this is discrimination against a person because of race and isnt even compareable...

in most cases discrimination is not illegal or even a bad thing. Seems some may not know what the word even means. That is understandable as it is often misused.

There is no legitimate or meaningful comparison between this and race based discrimination.

and let us not for get the other forms of age based discrimination:

Kid's menus, Kid's eat free night, kids hair cuts are cheaper (and NOT any easier), senior discounts, curfews, discounted tickets to attractions (for kids or the elderly).

not to mention: age restrictions to smoking, drinking, driving, having a job, concenting to sex.

if we follow the it is = to race discrimination then a 4 year old should be able to buy beer and consent to sex with whoever they choose. Oh and enter into and be held to contracts.

smoothcriminal12 said:

tinaz said:

I get what your are trying imply yes, but you are taking it to the extreme, its not age discrimination... Its an age requirement, or limit... Its not saying NO CHILDREN EVER, its saying to eat here, you must be at least 6 years old... Bars have them, Hell, even in the mall they have a rule noone under 16 without a parent, Even as adults we have age restrictions... In housing, jobs, to get insurance's... None of this is discrimination against a person because of race and isnt even compareable...

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

there is no comparison.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

there is no comparison.

Did you even read what I just said? I'm not going to argue with you.

smoothcriminal12 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

there is no comparison.

Did you even read what I just said? I'm not going to argue with you.

I did and it was factually and legally incorrect. I pointed out many examples where AGE is used to limit access to some good, service, or privilege, or right.

your argument would have it so a 1 year old could vote.

age is not a protected class in the same way race is.