Could someone please point out even one instance in this thread, anywhere, where anyone suggested that the restaurant owner should not be allowed to hand out mints in this way?

Not liking it, or even being offended by it, is not equivalent to wishing it banned, which many here seem to be implying.

Very good point, jlm_mi!

Yes, thank you, jlm_mi - I too have been puzzled by this inference. Although I personally would prefer not to be served these mints, I recognize that it is ultimately the choice of the restauanteur as to whether or not to serve them, and then my choice as to whether or not to go back there. For me, it really is that simple.

If I'd be of the same faith, I'd be offended as this is definitely sacriligeious. If I'd be of a different faith or an atheist I'd be offended by the management trying to force me to accept it. In any case I wouldn't just walk away.

There is a difference between seeing somebody in a public place wearing a t-shirt with a slogan you don't like and being unexpectedly proselytzed by the proprietors of a place of public accomodation. How would you feel checking into a hotel only to find a sign over your bed proclaiming that Allah is God and Christians are infidels?

Restaurants,hotels, and similar businesses are places of public accomodation, and as such are forbidden by law from refusing to serve people based on race or religion. The explanation "It's my restaurant and I can do what I want" doesn't work. (Am I the only one here who's old enough to remember the lunch counter sit-ins?)

In this case, the proprietors haven't done anything illegal, but they have acted in a way that could make customers justifiably feel uncomfortable and unwelcome based on their religious beliefs. Can they legally do it? Yes. Should they do it? That's a different question.

<<There is a difference between seeing somebody in a public place wearing a t-shirt with a slogan you don't like and being unexpectedly proselytzed by the proprietors of a place of public accomodation.>>

Yes, there is. I have no argument with those trying to remove religious symbols from publicly owned spaces/places. And is it France that now disallows wearing a cross or religion associated clothing to school? It's not too far a stretch that the ban will be applied to all publicly owned spaces/places, so maybe we should expect it.

While I may disagree with Kauai Pasta's owner's methods, I have to admire him. In the face of increasing political and potential economic pressures, he's chosen to practice his faith. Unlike many of the rest of us, he's trying to be more than a Sunday morning Christian.

Thanks for the chuckle, Sue.

Yes, jlm mi, it's true that nobody actually suggested the mints be banned, but on the other hand to draw a corollary between a dinner mint wrapper and Nazi or racist propaganda (either or both of which are banned in some countries) is to make a strong inference that the mints are more than just "inappropriate" as was suggested in the original post.

I suppose the reason I wouldn't take the mint amiss is because in the situation described, I wouldn't be a captive audience. Had I paid in advance for a meal, or boarded a train that wouldn't stop for 3 hours, etc., and then been required to sit through a religious lecture before I could either eat or escape, I would definitely feel coerced. I might even feel the same way had I found myself in a hotel room as KT describes (a banner over the bed, unlike a Gideon's bible, would be a bit hard to just chuck in a drawer). But a candy wrapper, not to mention candy, that I am free to throw away or refuse altogether I don't see as quite the same thing as proselytizing. I do acknowledge that a similar reasoning applies to tee-shirt wearers, i.e., my opinion is dependent on the degree to which one could avoid the tee shirt wearers.

KT does raise an interesting point about the content of the message; a religious tract that attacked a specific group I would probably find jarring, just as a tee-shirt with barely disguised (or not at all disguised) profanity is jarring to me. That said, I understood margot55 to be asking me if I would find the quotations inappropriate not because of the content of same, but simply because of their source per se, i.e., because they came from a religious document.

Well, I just went on the internet to look further into testamints - go to www.formar.com/testamints/products.html and you'll see why after all this discussion, it may be a moot point now... :-?

"Unlike many of the rest of us, he's trying to be more than a Sunday morning Christian."

Sorry, but I just don't equate proselytizing or spreading the word or whatever you want to call it with adhering to the morality of one's faith. You can be the worst Christian in the world despite handing out tracts, and you can put your Christianity into practice by acting morally without trying to convert others. Not all religions or sects consider proselytizing a moral duty, of course.

Can't we all just get along?? Shades of Rodney King!

Where's Dr. Fodor Kevorkian when we need him? :-?

Now I'm becoming uncomfortable.

No wait. It's my gym shorts riding up on me.
Sorry.

Gym shorts riding up on ya, Kal??? Yikes, a little too much info there!!!

Actually, we are all getting along. We're just not all agreeing. I think this has been a surprisingly civil thread, though I admit it's not really travel-related.

I'd rather eat a religious mint than have things ride up on me.

KT - travel-related, in that this took place at a new restaurant on our vacation in Kauai, no?

I copied and pasted the link, margot, but disappeared somewhere into cybernoman'sland.

<<Not all religions or sects consider proselytizing a moral duty, of course.>> But then, some do KT. Further, see Maggi's comment upthread.

Kal, unless I have a rag handy, I'll need to learn to stand further away from the monitor before reading your posts. Thanks.

<<Can't we all just get along??>> What??? We're not??? You should be at some of my family gatherings, bounty.

Well, margot55, tangentially travel-related. I realize that's why you posted it, but the ensuing discussion did venture a bit far afield. I didn't mean that comment as a criticism of you.

Of course, not everything that happens on a trip is travel related. Shall we disccuss the bronchitis I had while in London?

1. He certainly had a legal right to do use the mints to spread his faith. It wasn't on public property. In fact, it was at his privately owned establishment.

2. Here's the big question. How many of those who objected to what this person did would want to make it ILLEGAL to do such things even on PRIVATE property?

My feeling is that those who claim separation of church and state, if they were honest about it, would rather it be separation of church and EVERYTHING. Make it illegal to display, talk, demonatrate your faith in anyway except in church or your home, and only if noone could see or hear you.

Hi beachbum - sorry you lost that link, but here's what now comes up on that website:
"Unfortunately, Testamints are no longer available. From what we can gather, the compnay is currently closed and the product is not available anymore".

KT - no, because if we talk about your bronchitis in London, we'd have to talk about my bronchitis in Kauai a few years ago!

travelinandgolfin - at no point on this thread, at least as far as I can see, has anyone suggested that this action on the restautanteur's part have been illegal!!! If you can find a post that said that, please let me know, but I can't find it.

To everyone - I really have appreciated the lively and thought-provoking discussion that has come from my initial question, and I especially am grateful for the generally civil tone on a hot-button issue! Thanks!

Speaking of Kauai and travel.......
You can't touch me now.
I'm listening to one of my all time radio stations:
www.kkcr.org/live/live.html

And I just got done listening to the clip L'Italy sent me of that kid singing.
Laff out Loud Funny!!

B'bum,
My computer seems to be on the rag most of the time, too.
BTW, we are seriously thinking of a Portland trip in maybe June-July....so you are warned!

Margot, ridin' up 'cuz I got my Jockey's on!