Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-14-2019, 08:21 AM
 
45,135 posts, read 26,317,877 times
Reputation: 24869

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Your rights end where my rights begin.
My rights end where your rights begin.
your rights end at the doorway of my home or my business as do mine at yours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2019, 08:33 AM
 
20,260 posts, read 19,847,317 times
Reputation: 13348
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945
Besides, who wears a cap to a restaurant ? Probably only someone who has a pickup truck with a couple of dogs in the back and whose home used to have wheels on it.
I used to work and go to restaurants in Newark, NJ and I can guarantee you the hat wearers from 'da 'hood didn't arrive in pickup truck with a couple of dogs in the back and whose home used to have wheels on it.

But like you, I don't personally associate with people of low breeding so we do have that in common.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:01 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,206,123 times
Reputation: 9845
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftymh View Post
So now people can legally get rid of blacks or gays from their establishments. Just pretend to be offended by something they are wearing.

Our laws work on common sense. If you pretend to kick out gays and blacks because they're wearing, say, an Under Armor t-shirt; that's unreasonable. And you've likely broke the law by targeting someone based on race but using something else as an excuse. Unless you can reasonably argue why Under Armor would be offensive to your customers.

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:08 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,206,123 times
Reputation: 9845
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
There is reasoning behind no shirt, no shoes, no service and some businesses have specific dress codes.
ones personal offenses do not override the first amendment.
An unpleasant reaction to differing sports teams or political ideas might be a snide remark or eye roll not a beat down or being denied service. These things are not acceptable reactions.

The business has a right to maintains its reputation. If it is vital for a business to not associate with something because it may turn off the customer base, then that business has every right to reject customers who are associated with that thing.

Many bars and strip clubs do this: they will tell certain customers to leave or not wear specific clothing in the establishment least they be perceived as being a hangout for certain gangs/groups; and potentially alienating the opposing gangs/groups, other customers, or worst - be the target of retaliation or has its establishment targeted for violence.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:23 PM
 
20,703 posts, read 8,467,411 times
Reputation: 14325
If a store allowed stinking, typhus infected druggies in, I'd never shop there. It's bad enough being harassed by them on the street.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:36 PM
 
36,217 posts, read 30,664,456 times
Reputation: 32498
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
The business has a right to maintains its reputation. If it is vital for a business to not associate with something because it may turn off the customer base, then that business has every right to reject customers who are associated with that thing.

Many bars and strip clubs do this: they will tell certain customers to leave or not wear specific clothing in the establishment least they be perceived as being a hangout for certain gangs/groups; and potentially alienating the opposing gangs/groups, other customers, or worst - be the target of retaliation or has its establishment targeted for violence.


.
So I will pose this question to you also: So there have been several instances of people being attacked in businesses for speaking another language or wearing a hijab. Is it reasonable for business owners to refuse to serve those speaking Spanish or wearing offensive head coverings because they know there is always the possibility that another patron will confront them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:40 PM
 
Location: deafened by howls of 'racism!!!'
52,529 posts, read 34,259,842 times
Reputation: 29172
Quote:
But I guess for some groups, common sense, responsibility, and not being a snowflake is just too much to ask for.
the pinheads who cannot withstand the sight of a mere hat without flying into paroxysms of rage are indeed snowflakes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Planet earth
3,617 posts, read 1,816,610 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Nonetheless overreaction to a political statement is not acceptable adult behavior. Normal people dont accept that kind of behavior even from children. To refuse service to someone or physically attack them for their beliefs is taking a big giant step backwards for our society.

And the first amendment gives us the right to speak and express our thoughts and beliefs so that we do not have to fear retribution from the government or others who do not agree with us.

To refuse service to someone over a political belief is NOT illegal. To physically attack someone IS illegal. We shouldn't confuse the two by equating them as equally harmful. One deals with a property owner exercising their property rights. The other encroaches upon the right of a person to not be assaulted.



If I own a piece of property, I don't even need to express why I am demanding a person leave my property. It is my property, therefore it is my right. However if I lay a hand on someone, use force, for anything other than defense of self, defense of others or defense of property, I'm going to have some serious explaining to do when I'm standing in front of a judge.


You do NOT have a right to express yourself on MY property. The only way you can express yourself on my property is IF I allow it because it is MY property. PERIOD.


There are a lot of people who confuse rights which are protected from government infringing upon with being some kind of an absolute set of rights where no one can intrude upon them. Even in the case of harm, one does NOT have an absolute right to not be harmed. If they themselves are harming someone, their right to not be harmed goes away.


It shouldn't be a difficult thing to explain BUT it appears some people just don't get it.



But then again, that's just MY opinion, for what it's worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Planet earth
3,617 posts, read 1,816,610 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
Lol, so if I am offended by something, I have the right to object to providing service.... How very Jim Crow of you...

I don't know that this is Jim Crow of someone. It is merely their right as the property owner.




But then again, that's just MY opinion, for what it's worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2019, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Planet earth
3,617 posts, read 1,816,610 times
Reputation: 1258
Quote:
Originally Posted by j7r6s View Post
"No shoes, no shirt" is a hygiene issue that I've only ever seen in restaurants.

I'd never expect someone to be assaulted for wearing opposing team colors. Fans of the opposing team will get invited to eat and drink at every tailgate on the way to the stadium around here.

Protecting unpopular political speech is the bedrock of the First Amendment. It's no more "common sense" for a business to throw you out for your political beliefs than to refuse you service because you're Jewish or a woman.

With all due respect... it appears you have ZERO clue what the 1st amendment says and means. It begins with the text, "Congress shall make no law..." It does NOT say a property owner cannot prohibit these things on their property.




But then again, that's just MY opinion, for what it's worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:25 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top