Sarah Sanders, Red Hen, and Social Engineering by the State

This will be seriously politically incorrect.

The management at Red Hen, the Virginia restaurant that booted Trump press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has all the right in the world to deny service to any person it does not want patronizing its business. 

It is illegal in many states to this, especially based in skin color, religion, sexual orientation, disability, etc. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it so. 

Three jurisdictions forbid discrimination based on political affiliation—Washington DC, Seattle, and the Virgin Islands. 

According to the Law & Crime website, if “establishments in D.C. take a cue from [Red Hen], they could be held in violation of D.C. Code Section 2-1402.31, which bars discriminatory actions against people in whole or in part due to characteristics including race, religion, nationality, sex, age, and more, including political affiliation. Violations can result in punishments including court-ordered corrective action or monetary penalties.”

If you own a restaurant or any other “public accommodation” in DC, you cannot “discriminate” against people holding political opinions you disagree with. You are bound by law to serve Ku Klux Klan members and Antifa terrorists alike. 

It was Thomas Jefferson who said the only moral commercial transaction is one truly voluntary on the part of the buyer and the seller. 

The ideas of Thomas Jefferson—principal author of the Declaration of Independence—went out of fashion many years ago. According to the Identity politics crowd, his wisdom is the wisdom of a privileged white slave owner. 

The liberal social engineers busy at working destroying the Constitution believe the exercise of natural rights—the rights you are born with—permits racists, homophobes, and sexists to spread their poison throughout Hillary Clinton’s village. Natural rights are an excuse for privileged white heterosexual males to act deplorably. 

Now that the shoe is on the other foot—a “privileged white” was denied service for the crime of working for the president of the United States—it will be interesting to see what the response is. 

For these folks, application of the law is predicated on “diversity.” It revolves around “protected groups” of people designated by the state, people said to have been oppressed for centuries by evil white slave owners and Indian killers. 

According to the Identity crowd Trump is Hitler, a racist, a child abuser, a pervert who had sex with a porn star and soiled a bed Obama slept in. It is “justice”—as one tweeter put it—Sanders was denied service.  

The alt-right MAGA supporters want to punish the Red Hen for its behavior. MAGA tweets call for a boycott. This is certainly their right—unless the boycott target is Israel—but the effort is not likely to be effective. Democrats may respond by packing the restaurant every night with comrades from the rank and file of Nancy Pelosi and Chuckie Schumer’s Resistance. 

In a more sane and rational world, every property owner would have the freedom to exercise the natural born right to deny service or goods to any person for any reason. When government steps in and tells you what you can and can’t do with your property, you are reduced to the status of a landless serf at the mercy of the state. 

I’m afraid we’re at the point now where far too many Americans believe the state should be the final arbiter in personal matters. Decades of social engineering have resulted in a dumbed-down public, citizens that agree the state has the right to use violence against those who nonviolently resist its authority. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

30 thoughts on “Sarah Sanders, Red Hen, and Social Engineering by the State”

  1. All privileged whites should invite every skin color on the planet to come and turn America inside out. Once America has been fully destroyed, we can finally rejoice and enjoy the diaspora and dystopia to follow. After all, these are the “natural rights” we should abide by.

    Like

  2. “It is illegal in many states to do this, especially based in skin color, religion, sexual orientation, disability, etc. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it so.
    Three jurisdictions forbid discrimination based on political affiliation – Washington DC, Seattle, and the Virgin Islands”.
    Yes, sadly that is all true. It is two more examples of our benevolent tyrants telling us what to do with our so called “private property”.

    Like

  3. “It is illegal in many states to this, especially based in skin color, religion, sexual orientation, disability, etc. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it so.
    Three jurisdictions forbid discrimination based on political affiliation—Washington DC, Seattle, and the Virgin Islands”.
    More examples of our benevolent tyrants telling us what to do with our so called “private property”.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s