Comments on: Minneapolis Town Hall Brewery Boycott In Progress

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 17:48:01 +0000

Patrick, that is an interesting interpretation, but I think anyone who clicks through and read the original information would form an opinion different than yours.

By: Patrick Bowling

Patrick Bowling — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 16:52:56 +0000

I’ve read both your and the linked article and nowhere did it suggest the brewery of saying what you quoted them of doing so. I understand that blogging is alternative news but when using quotes you are implying they have said that. Very sloppy

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 03:16:44 +0000

OK, I’ve checked. It was an informal event, much like some of the things I’ve scheduled there … a guest of honor who will have the audience for a while while people eat, etc. (In fact, I was the guest of honor once.) We did Francis Thackary there once. Which was funny because he thought we were going to the Town Hall. Like, where the Mayor is. He was happy to find out that it was a tavern.

By: Stephanie Z

Stephanie Z — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:41:57 +0000

That’s one of the things Ben wanted to check out.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:17:16 +0000

In fact, I just checked their web site and they still don’t seem to have shows. Or at least, there is no evidence that they have any scheduled. Just beer tastings and the usual other stuff.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:14:54 +0000

They have shows at the Town Hall? That’s new. I stand corrected. It makes it much, much worse, of course.

By: Stephanie Z

Stephanie Z — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:11:30 +0000

Greg, this was a show, not a dinner.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:03:02 +0000

Itzac: “They have an interest in not upsetting their customers. Hosting an event that would likely result in some of their customers being offended runs counter to that interest” Have you ever been to the restaurant in question? I am a typical patron.

The issue in question is not providing someone with a soapbox. The establishment has a large back room that is not separate from the rest of the place (there is not door or wall) but is hardly ever used by day to day customers. You can arrange to have several tables blocked off there for a large party. That’s it. I’ve made that arrangement with them a number of times, generally connected with conferences and such (often, indeed, having to do with EVOLUTION and stuff!). I’ve even made the arrangement with political groups. The statement that there is no “political or religious” thing going on there is a lie.

Really, all we are talking about is a large restaurant that has the ability to take an extra-large size reservation (like, 40 or 50 people) … not in a separate banquet hall, but in the restaurant itself, in an area not separated from the rest of the restaurant.

Specifically stating that a certain category of person (atheists) are not allowed to make reservations and have dinner there is somewhat problematic.

By: itzac

itzac — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:19:56 +0000

They have an interest in not upsetting their customers. Hosting an event that would likely result in some of their customers being offended runs counter to that interest. They have no obligation to provide anyone with a soapbox. I’d say wait until they host an event with a significant religious or political purpose before calling for a boycott. Or at least until there are more details on the content of the voicemail.

By: MadScientist

MadScientist — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:31:26 +0000

They just don’t get it – not believing in fairies isn’t a religion. They don’t want to offend anyone? Fuck that, that’s not their job. There is nothing in the constitution to protect people from being offended.

Anyway, if someone cancels agreed events without notice, fuck ’em – don’t give them any of your damned money. Take your business elsewhere – that’s the way it’s always been and the way it should be.