Restaurants: from breast feeding to dogs—what’s next—pet pigs?

The Food Bill presently before parliament will allow restaurant owners to choose whether or not to allow pet owners to bring their pets into their respective restaurants.

From breast feeding…….…….to pet dogs……....….to pet pigs?

Here we go again with yet another piece of worthless legislation—a piece of legislation that will favour the minority and penalise the majority.

Before getting into that, however, a quick look back at the controversy over breast feeding in restaurants a few months back is called for. Remember the Timaru café story where the owner got into hot water after telling a patron to cover up while breast feeding? Well during that controversy, I went over to Kiwiblog and made a few comments on the subject, and some liberal woman who was in favour of breast feeding did the usual liberal thing of de-sexualising breasts by calling them ‘food dispensers.’  Yes, breasts conveniently became food dispensers to suit her liberal argument. The problem with her doublethink argument, however, was this: if a man were to go over and touch a woman’s desexualised food dispensers, they would instantly change back to breasts and would instantly become sexual again, and the guy would be charged with sexual harassment.

Don’t get me wrong; I like breasts, but as for dogs I can take them or leave them—I’m not fussed either way, but there is a place for everything, and a restaurant is not a place for either. No one is forcing anyone to have babies, nor have dogs; that is a personal choice which comes with personal responsibilities and restrictions. People who have babies and dogs have no right to force their personal choices onto the mainstream public.

Even though the bill—as I understand it—refers to ‘pets,’ it is obviously intended for dog owners, but it is not restricted to dogs; therefore, pigs could be allowed in a restaurant if an owner so permitted. Without question this very unlikely to happen, but I can envisage some stupid, politically-correct nutter screaming discrimination as a result of this bill because he/she was prohibited from bringing his/her pet ducks into a restaurant that only allowed dogs.

The real problem I have with this bill, however, its premise is divisive. That is, restaurant owners have the choice to allow or not allow dogs, which is the way the free market should operate; however, if half the restaurants choose to allow dogs in my area, for example, I will lose half my restaurant choice because I don’t want to eat with dogs. Not only would my choice be halved, the same would apply to dog owners as well, unless of course the dog owner chooses to leave his/her dog at home.

There is another angle to this as well, and that is this: when they banned cigarette smoking in restaurants, they didn’t give restaurant owners the choice, they banned it for everyone. So surely if restaurant owners have a choice in respect to dogs, then shouldn’t they also have the same choice in respect to cigarette smoking. So what the government is saying here is this: the public can choose which restaurants and bars to go to in respect to dogs, but they have no choice in respect to smoking—complete doublethink.

In respect to this pet nonsense, I am completely baffled as to where it came from; I never heard  any party campaign for pets in restaurants; I never heard any lobby group pushing for it—where did it come from? Why are we needlessly changing an unbroken law; why are we needlessly penalising people?

For me, personally, this is yet another unnecessary law that will further divide people.

Watch Sunlive’s video; differing views on dogs in restaurants:

NZ Herald’s article on it:

Food Bill opens door for pets in restaurants

Dog owners may soon be allowed to bring their four-legged friends along on a night out.

The Food Bill, which is currently before Parliament, would give bar and restaurant owners the option of allowing pets on their premises.

The practice is currently banned under the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974.

The success of the proposed change would depend largely on the kinds of dogs and restaurants involved, said Hospitality New Zealand Auckland president Kevin Schwass.

He noted that while the practice might work in bars, it could prove problematic in restaurants.

"There would be some challenges involved.

"If a dog got a bit unruly, I'm not sure how you would handle it."

QF Tavern manager Steve Tuala agreed that the proposal could work in bars, but would be inappropriate in a restaurant. Read more