Skip to comments.Atheist files complaint over Lancaster County restaurant's church-bulletin discount
Posted on 07/04/2012 10:19:55 AM PDT by Engraved-on-His-hands
For more than a year, Prudhommes Lost Cajun Kitchen in Columbia, Lancaster County has offered a Sunday special: Diners who bring in a current church bulletin receive 10 percent off the purchase of their dinners.
But, the promotion has rubbed some people the wrong way, including John Wolff of Manheim Twp., Lancaster County, an atheist and member of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
Wolff, who said he's never been to Prudhommes, recently filed a complaint with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission claiming the 22-year-old restaurant should not give discounts based on religion. I bear them no ill will but they shouldnt be pushing religion, Wolff, 80, said.(Snip)
Shannon Powers, spokeswoman for the Human Relations Commission, confirmed the complaint had been filed. Prudhommes has 30 days to submit a written answer to the complaint, she added.
Over the past couple of months, Prudhomme said, she received two letters and a phone call from the Freedom From Religion Foundation demanding the restaurant end the promotion.
(Excerpt) Read more at pennlive.com ...
Freedom From Religion Foundation...
Sounds like a criminal enterprise. There is no way that it can be argued that giving a discount for church bulletins at a private restaurant is illegal. Someone needs to bring a lawsuit against the Freedom From Religion Foundation and shut them down for engaging in organized violation of Constitutional rights.
I just have one ? for this atheist. Is this restaurant government run? NO, well then SHUT UP!!!
Post the complaintant's picture on the front door and deny him service in perpetuity.
IMHO, a private business should be able to offer discounts to whomever they choose. Senior section of the menu? Yes. Bars that offer half price drinks to the gals? Yes. Restaurants that offer a discount to people who bring in a recent bulletin? Yes. If the atheists don’t like... then choose another restaurant.
If it ever gets to court it would be tossed out on summary judgment. Unless it is in front of a wacko liberal judge. The restaurant is not a government entity of any sort. It does not force anybody to do anything. Their promotion isn’t a law either. Hey atheist idiot.....go to hell.
Mr Wolffe is 80 years old.Nature will soon resolve the problem for him.
Nothing is stopping them from going to church and getting a bulletin. Maybe they’ll learn something.
No one’s stopping the atheist from getting a church bulletin.
Sadly, I’ve become so cynical that I believe the atheist will prevail and force the restaurant to bend to his will.
He is 80 years old. Soon, he will meet the God whom he has denied for his entire life. I don’t wish it on anyone, but it won’t be pretty. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
It’s not a religious discount. It’s surveying whether or not money paid for advertising is worth it. If no one brings in a current bulletin from a church, the business drops that venue for advertising.
This should never see a courtroom.
The suit is not meant to win, just to harass the owner and force him to spend money to defend it in court. No doubt the atheist jerk has some ACLU lawyer who is happily suing them pro bono.
Another issue here is the proliferation of “Human Relations Commissions” and “Human Rights Commissions” in states across the nation. They have power over increasingly ridiculous complaints. Consider the following example:
On September 21, 2006, a homosexual couple contacted Elaine Huguenin of Elane Photography via e-mail to see if they could arrange for photography for their commitment ceremony. Elaine responded saying that she photographed traditional weddings but did not photograph same-sex weddings. On December 20, 2006, one member of the homosexual couple filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission. A trial was held in January of 2008, and on April 9th the Human Rights Commission ruled that Elaine Huguenin violated the New Mexico Human Rights Acts by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. They fined Mrs. Huguenin $6,637.94.
Hopefully not. I understand being cynical.... I am the same way.
Run a promotion that anyone bringing in articles mocking atheists and the FFRF gets an ‘11’% promotion.
Edit 11% DISCOUNT.
John Wolff kind of provs the point.
John Wolff kind of provs the point.
Midstate PA ping.
In light of this, maybe the restaurant should up the discount to 15%.
ooops wrong one..
That's a pretty big "but."
Since Religious organizations provide a lot of free health care via charities and hospitals..I think the it should be mandated that all US citizens be required to contibute to a church of their choice or pay a tax penalty to the IRS.
Next time in Lancaster I know where I WILL be eating. Right there at Cajuns!
I have no doubt he is going to loose this one. Guy is an idiot.
A private business can give discounts to whomever it pleases.Why,it can even give a discount to likes of filthy Marxists like you,Comrade Wolff.
I first saw this “Church bulletin discount” about 10 years ago in Alabama and wondered when the atheists would start a law suit.
“Freedom from Religion Foundation” is in itself a highly intolerant form of religious prejudice. It is typical of a certain mindset, that if something offends the protagonist, then nobody else is allowed to partake of the offending practice. If the offended one doesn’t like the taste of bacon, for example, then the production, sale, distribution or consumption of bacon everywhere is forbidden.
Pigs everywhere are overjoyed, for what particular reason they have not yet completely thought through. The pig only lives long enough, then, for the eventual production of ham, pork chops, and pickled pigs’ feet.
“If the atheists dont like... then choose another restaurant...” Or.....here’s a wild thought: If the atheists dont like... then go to church and get a bulletin so YOU can get the discount. Duh!
Pppffft. My sister is an athiest. One day, she asked me if I had a problem with that, being that I am ‘a Christian and all’. My response- “Why should it bother me? YOU are the one going to hell.”
Not too much later, I heard her arguing to our brother that she thought the nieces and nephews needed to go to Catholic schools and to church, that they needed God.
What can I say, my family put the ‘fun’’ in dysfunctional’. With half of us responsible Conservative, half liberal crybaby weenies, one athiest, several recovering Catholics in the mix, Thanksgivings sure are animated.
Upon further thought....... I don’t think this dweeb has a leg to stand on. By his own admission, he has never darkened the door of that restaurant. IF.....his complaint were that it irks him to be sitting there having a meal, paying full price, while these people come in with their church bulletins and are charged a lower price than he has to pay....maybe he’d have grounds. But as it is, ONLY if his case goes to Chief Justice John Roberts does he have a chance of winning. IMHO
Wow... a whole 3 contacts on this monumental matter!
Maybe they'll give him the break if he presents their Freedom From Religion Foundation rag?
“... go to church and get a bulletin so YOU can get the discount”.
That makes 100% sense. However, you know these extreme atheist groups. They want “others” to change their religious beliefs to suit them. They refuse to change or alter their habits. They want the term “religion” (any Christian/Judeo one) to be gone completely from society. I personally think they seek out issues to litigate. Little by little.. they attempt to chip away from religious freedom in order to make our Country “free” from God. IMHO. Hugs, Mom
That pisses me off. It is a direct violation of the New Mexico Constitution:
Art II, Sec. 11. [Freedom of religion.]The court is obviously invalidating the underlined, but it is also violating the bolded: in that it is denying the civil privilege to deny services dependent upon the photographer's religious grounds. These two are solidly provable.
Every man shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no person shall ever be molested or denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his religious opinion or mode of religious worship. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any religious sect or denomination; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.
There is also a case, though somewhat less solid, that the court is also violating the italicized portion, this is based on the idea that sexual intercourse is a mode of worship. This is a little less obvious, but well provable via history and religions: think of how many religions had "temple prostitutes" or orgies.
If he doesn’t like their policies he should just go dine somewhere else - if he’s so offended why would he want to give them his business and therefore his money?
These people who claim they want to “free” others from religion like this are just wanting to foist their own religion on everyone else.
Making bad trouble for good people. What America has become.
And it’ll be “downhill” from there.
“What can I say, my family put the fun in dysfunctional. With half of us responsible Conservative, half liberal crybaby weenies, one athiest, several recovering Catholics in the mix, Thanksgivings sure are animated.”
Wait until those half-liberal crybaby-weennies and atheist find out that the holiday of Thanksgiving was a rejection of collectivism and instead a personal and corporate thanks to God for the creation of individual, free enterprise capitalism (via William Bradford) that inspired the breaking off from the Crown and becoming a world economic superpower as well as a military one.
FFRF, run by Annie Laurie Gaylor and her husband, placed full-page ads in both the NYT and today’s LAT telling Catholics to quit the Church.
Query: How exactly is FFRF funded?
A trial was held? With a judge and a jury and everything? ---- I'll bet not. There were no damages. Could Huguenin be sued for refusing to photograph a Klan cross burning?
I have a great idea.
Have the owners of the restaurant revise their discount for a time to say this:
“A 10% discount to all customers except John Wolff and members of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.”
They could also including members of OWS and its affiliates, Rainbow PUSH coalition, and other Leftist organizations.
That’s a Wookie-sized “but” at that!
Agreed. I'm an atheist, and I fail to see why something like this would get an atheist's panties in a wad.
One of my favorite Thai restaurants in the Seattle suburbs had an item in their menu saying that everything in their restaurant was "dedicated to our lord and savior, etc." Did I avoid that place? Hell no. It was the best Thai food within miles.
Sometimes I wish my fellow atheists would just shut up and get a life.
Mr. Wollf simply needs to understand that this is just a penalty for not going to church. Not discrimination and not a tax.
If it’s private property I would tell them to buzz off. In fact I would charge the freedom from religion foundation 10 % more than regular price if they show up.
It’s not based on religion. It’s based on Church attendance. And let me tell you, those are two entirely different things!
Private business is free to offer discounts to anyone for any reason.
In this case you only have to hold a church bulletin, NOT share their beliefs.
It’s a privately owned business - they should be able to do whatever the f*ck they want.
This guy’s apparenly saying that restaurants have the right to ban guns if they see fit, but not to encourage religion.
He’s full of sh*t.
Bringing more attention to the restaurant, and greatly increasing their business, I”m sure.
Shooting your “cause” in the foot by doing this is fabulous.
What is the difference if a business establishment offers a discount to veterans or church goers or senior citizens...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.