can you believe this?

[NicoleLJ]

Having been a waitress in my younger years I can totally understand this concept. I am not totally sure if it would be disgrimination because many bars that also are restraunts do not allow children either. When I was waitressing I really appreciated parents that had taught their children manners. But to be honest they were in the minority. Most parents would go to the place I worked and just let their kids run wild. Bothering other patrons and leaving a huge mess and usually little to no tip. The regular arguement we waitresses had was that we were paid to serve food, take care of drinks and needs and clean up a reasonable amount of mess. We were not there to spend a half hour cleaning up after a food fight, or falling over children as we walk around with a tray of drinks, or have food smeared on us or thrown at us. So yup I can see why they would want to do this.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Yes, it is discriminatory.

Just as a restaurant that only serve fish discriminates against non-fish eaters. Or vegan restaurants discriminate against people who want to eat meat. That does not make it illegal.

Amusement parks discriminate when they establish a minimum height for rides.

Bars discriminate when they say you must be 21 to enter.

Stores discriminate when they post "no shoes, no shirts, no service."

Discrimination is not illegal. Certain discrimination is.

I have read the restaurant is getting overwhelming support.

[Karen]

I believe it. It is not a public building, therefore he can set his own rules, and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't be allowed to ban children under a certain age. If parents really want to go there, they can hire a babysitter. There is no way we can legislate socially responsible parenting, so it is his decision, and his business.

[happylabs]

I often have said when out to dinner at a restaurant that there should be a section especially for people with children, or, a quiet zone. I'm sorry but parents these days do not seem to discipline their children. When my kids were little we always took them with us but they were well behaved. We sat and talked with them and did activities with them. These days it seems parents are distracted by cell phones. There is nothing worse than trying to have a quiet meal out at a restaurant and having to listen to someone's child whining, screaming, etc. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

[moosmom]

I often have said when out to dinner at a restaurant that there should be a section especially for people with children, or, a quiet zone. I'm sorry but parents these days do not seem to discipline their children. When my kids were little we always took them with us but they were well behaved. We sat and talked with them and did activities with them. These days it seems parents are distracted by cell phones. There is nothing worse than trying to have a quiet meal out at a restaurant and having to listen to someone's child whining, screaming, etc. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

Amen!!

[Asiel]

They certainly have my vote on this. Nothing worse than going out for a nice meal and having it ruined by screaming , ill behaved children.

[Lady's Human]

Now if we could just eliminate the inconsiderate, ill behaved adults, the world would be a better place across the board.

[jennielynn1970]

They certainly have my vote on this. Nothing worse than going out for a nice meal and having it ruined by screaming , ill behaved children.

Amen to this!!

I totally back the decision.

[Edwina's Secretary]

...It is not a public building, therefore he can set his own rules,...

It still falls under public accomodations so there are limits on the rules he can set about who he will serve. He cannot, for instance, refuse to serve anyone who is Irish or of Irish descent. Or Baptists. Or Chinese.

But having children is not a "protected class."

I get tired of everybody screaming "Discrimination" all the time. Of course people discriminate and, unless it is illegal discrimination the government cannot come in and tell you how to run your business.

[Lady's Human]

It still falls under public accomodations so there are limits on the rules he can set about who he will serve. He cannot, for instance, refuse to serve anyone who is Irish or of Irish descent. Or Baptists. Or Chinese.

How about French? Can he refuse to serve them? Damned surrender monkeys. (I kid, I kid)

[happylabs]

How about French? Can he refuse to serve them? Damned surrender monkeys. (I kid, I kid)

I'm thinking there is an Aussie around here they may want to refuse to serve too.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Sorry guys...national origin...French - Aussie...Brits...Slovenian - protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...you know - those people!

[wombat2u2004]

I'm thinking there is an Aussie around here they may want to refuse to serve too.

He probably would refuse to serve a party animal like me

[cassiesmom]

Well... Some restaurants are more appropriate for families than others. I don't think I'd take young children to Charlie Trotter's or Les Nomades. But at the same time there are good choices for families with kids -- most of the Lettuce Entertain You spots, the Cheesecake Factory or most of the restaurants on Navy Pier. I'd be disappointed if I didn't see families with children having fun at a place like that.

[lizbud]

It still falls under public accomodations so there are limits on the rules he can set about who he will serve. He cannot, for instance, refuse to serve anyone who is Irish or of Irish descent. Or Baptists. Or Chinese.

Or Gay.

There was a case in Indy where a Gay group order a tray of cookies at the city market. They wanted the cookies decorated with rainbow colored sprinkles. (It was to celebrate some Gay event in the city) The store owner
refused their order because he didn't want to "endorse" their event.

The shop got so much bad press I think they changed their mind, but by
then the group bought their cookies elsewhere.