You could argue both ways but it's a bad comparison. A restaurant does not exist to provide a religious service - the kashrus is just a way of making the primary service (the food) acceptable to religious people. A mikve's only existence is as a religious service. Nobody is using it for anything else so to say they should have the choice to do so unhalachically makes a lot less sense.

(Not getting into what's halachic and what isn't - like I said, you can argue either way about the level of standards, but not that it's just a service and there shouldn't be any.)

Its possible he's upset because along with trying to prevent the hetrodox movements from using the mikvaot for their "conversions", the law of power abhors a vaacum and the law of unintended consequences just handed over the power to block women (men can use mikvaot without explaining anything to anyone) who want to immerse in order to ascend Har HaBayit, for example.

Its possible he's upset because along with trying to prevent the hetrodox movements from using the mikvaot for their "conversions", the law of power abhors a vaacum and the law of unintended consequences just handed over the power to block women (men can use mikvaot without explaining anything to anyone) who want to immerse in order to ascend Har HaBayit, for example.