Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When you open a business, it is YOUR responsibility as the business owner to know and understand the laws of the city you conduct business in. In Lexington, there is an ordinance which prohibits businesses from discriminating against sexual orientation. This business owner should have known that. Had this business been in operation in Bloomsburg, PA -- where the bridal shop was that said, "NO" to a lesbian couple, this t-shirt shop would NOT have been in violation of anything. The only thing the t-shirt shop could have faced would have been social recourse. In this case, Lexington DOES have a law that includes sexual orientation, so I don't know why anyone is complaining. If you don't like the law, work to change it so a business can discriminate against people wearing the color green or whatever other stupid bias people come up with.
The Human Rights Commission found in 2012 that Hands On Originals violated the city's fairness ordinance, which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.
Just proof positive that there really is no private property or business in the shadow of this GODvernment. If you cannot control who comes on your property or whom you do business with, it is the government's, not the person's.
Well, this business learned about the local ordinances the hard way. You can't discriminate against some people. Sexual orientation and gender identity are protected from being discriminated. Period. They should have done their due diligence. That's on them and now they are paying.
I've asked this before and because of the ruling described in the linked article will ask it again: What is the purpose of and what will be gained (or hoped for) by forcing people to attend diversity training? At best, it's a feeble attempt at brainwashing into people an ideology they are not inclined to agree with in the first place.
When you open a business, it is YOUR responsibility as the business owner to know and understand the laws of the city you conduct business in. In Lexington, there is an ordinance which prohibits businesses from discriminating against sexual orientation. This business owner should have known that. Had this business been in operation in Bloomsburg, PA -- where the bridal shop was that said, "NO" to a lesbian couple, this t-shirt shop would NOT have been in violation of anything. The only thing the t-shirt shop could have faced would have been social recourse. In this case, Lexington DOES have a law that includes sexual orientation, so I don't know why anyone is complaining. If you don't like the law, work to change it so a business can discriminate against people wearing the color green or whatever other stupid bias people come up with.
The Human Rights Commission found in 2012 that Hands On Originals violated the city's fairness ordinance, which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.
The ruling also means that Hands On may not discriminate in the future, Sexton said, and that in the next year, its employees will have to undergo diversity training.
The Human Rights Commission found in 2012 that Hands On Originals violated the city's fairness ordinance, which prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.
what if the shop was more than happy to make shirts for them provided they weren't about gay pride?
what if the shop was more than happy to make shirts for them provided they weren't about gay pride?
I wonder how that would pan out.
It doesn't really matter, at least from the government's standpoint. It believes it has the authority to control "private" business and property. Business and property "owners" are "legally" employees and property of the State.
I've asked this before and because of the ruling described in the linked article will ask it again: What is the purpose of and what will be gained (or hoped for) by forcing people to attend diversity training? At best, it's a feeble attempt at brainwashing into people an ideology they are not inclined to agree with in the first place.
It's a feel good act. I went to diversity training every year for near 10 years at my company.
Yeah..classic propaganda brainwashing.
It became a joke after a while when someone made some "flowery comments" and we would chime in.."off to diversity class for you"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
