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.
If a person applies for the permits to have a pool and proactively has one installed, should he be allowed to say he doesn't want any Asians to swim in his pool if it's the only one in the neighborhood?
/Sigh
If the dude gets a permit to have a pool, proactively has one installs, and then keeps it to himself or friends, then he can say he doesn't want asians in his pool. People can think whatever they want of him, they can even call him a racist, or talk about their sex lives in front of his kids. LOL
HOWEVER if the dude gets a permit, installs it, and then sells access to the pool to the public, he not only risks getting busted by the municipality, but he cannot say he doesn't want asians in his pool while he is running his business.
If the dude gets a permit to have a pool, proactively has one installs, and then keeps it to himself or friends, then he can say he doesn't want asians in his pool. People can think whatever they want of him, they can even call him a racist, or talk about their sex lives in front of his kids. LOL
HOWEVER if the dude gets a permit, installs it, and then sells access to the pool to the public, he not only risks getting busted by the municipality, but he cannot say he doesn't want asians in his pool while he is running his business.
So essentially, once he engages in commerce, he must accommodate all? That's what you believe it boils down to.
Because the person is opening a business for the public. The public, by definition, includes all. Exclusion of any one member of the public for arbitrary reasons is damaging to society as a whole. History has proven this repeatedly.
Because the person is opening a business for the public. The public, by definition, includes all. Exclusion of any one member of the public for arbitrary reasons is damaging to society as a whole. History has proven this repeatedly.
Do you feel the posting online and verbalization in public of racist speech is damaging to society as a whole?
Do you feel blatant actions of racism by people is damaging to society as a whole?
I'm pretty sure your right to refuse service can't be arbitrary, and has to be applied consistently. An argument could easily be made that you are arbitrarily refusing service because I drive a hummer, or prius.
I'm not a legal expert, but I can google. And google found this for me
"If there’s an anti-discrimination law, does that mean that a business can never refuse service to a member of a group that is protected from discrimination?
The answer is that you can refuse to serve someone even if they’re in a protected group, but the refusal can’t be arbitrary and you can’t apply it to just one group of people.
To avoid being arbitrary, there must be a reason for refusing service and you must be consistent. There could be a dress code to maintain a sense of decorum, or fire code restrictions on how many people can be in your place of business at one time, or a policy related to the health and safety of your customers and employees. But you can’t just randomly refuse service to someone because you don’t like the way they look or dress.
Second, you must apply your policy to everyone. For example, you can’t turn away a black person who’s not wearing a tie and then let in a tieless white man. You also can’t have a policy that sounds like it applies to everyone but really just excludes one particular group of people. So, for example, a policy against wearing headscarves in a restaurant would probably be discriminatory against Muslims."
So in short, I'll be swinging by your place of business with my Bernie Sanders shirt & iphone camera filming. Please kick me out.
You don't understand the article.
It means I can't use subterfuge to discriminate against a protected class. If you're black with a Sanders shirt I can't refuse service to you and then serve 10 whites wearing a Sanders shirt. That would give you a case.
I'd refuse service regardless of race, religion, gender, age, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual orientation to anyone wearing an 'I Am Augiec' shirt. Perfectly legal. No burger for you.
Do you feel the posting online and verbalization in public of racist speech is damaging to society as a whole?
Do you feel blatant actions of racism by people is damaging to society as a whole?
Edit: We'll get to the exact damage in a bit.
To some degree, but generally speaking actions are more damaging than speech. The exception of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind where speech is damaging. That said, someone could come up to me and address me in a racial epithet, and it would hurt my feelings as an individual, but no; not damaging to society. At least I don't think it is, and I'm pretty sure the law would agree with me there.
Regarding which actions are damaging to society as a whole, it would depend on specifics. Most of which have been codified by now.
To some degree, but generally speaking actions are more damaging than speech. The exception of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind where speech is damaging. That said, someone could come up to me and address me in a racial epithet, and it would hurt my feelings as an individual, but no; not damaging to society. At least I don't think it is, and I'm pretty sure the law would agree with me there.
Regarding which actions are damaging to society as a whole, it would depend on specifics. Most of which have been codified by now.
Let's take the case of a wedding cake. How are the actions of not buying a wedding cake from one specific vendor more damaging than your neighbor making homophobic comments about you whenever you run into him getting the mail?
Let's take the case of a wedding cake. How are the actions of not buying a wedding cake from one specific vendor more damaging than your neighbor making homophobic comments about you whenever you run into him getting the mail?
It's not a matter of not buying a wedding cake that's the issue. It's that the baker refuses to bake a cake for a specific person because of who that person is. Your example didn't mention that the baker made the cake and customer didn't buy it. It stated that the baker refused to bake the cake in the first place for that specific person due to some discriminatory reason.
That's the part that's harmful to society. Allowing businesses to do that for any reason whatsoever will inevitably create a hostile commercial environment for minorities. It's been proven in the past, and I assume that's what lawmakers and the majority who elected them want to avoid going forward.
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.
