Posted on 05/10/2016 3:14:44 AM PDT by reaganaut1
It can be an awkward order for a pregnant woman: A glass of merlot, please.
But she is legally entitled to it, according to New York City.
For the first time, the city is explicitly prohibiting restaurants and bars from refusing alcoholic drink orders to mothers-to-be, with new guidelines that say doing so would represent discrimination under the citys Human Rights Law.
While covered entities may attempt to justify certain categorical exclusions based on maternal or fetal safety, using safety as a pretext for discrimination or as a way to reinforce traditional gender norms or stereotypes is unlawful, the guidance released by the Commission on Human Rights on Friday says.
That would also apply to foods deemed risky during pregnancy, such as raw fish or soft cheese. But its alcohol consumption by pregnant women that has long driven the touchiest debates over private etiquette and public policy.
At least 18 states have laws that regard the use of intoxicants by pregnant women as child abuse, according to a survey by ProPublica. It was not clear how many jurisdictions have rules that specifically ban restaurants and bars from refusing alcohol service.
Several medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Surgeon Generals Office, discourage any alcohol consumption. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has gone even further, recommending that sexually active women who are not using birth control abstain from alcohol.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
(1) Unborn children must be thought of worthless clumps of cells, whose health does not matter. Otherwise the morality of abortion would be questioned.
(2) Women are a victim class, and any restriction on them, even to avoid ruining someone's life with fetal alcohol syndrome, must be avoided.
Get me a drink.
I tell ‘em to sue me. I doubt any jury would buy this
Will New York City protect bartenders from being sued by pregnant women who drank too much and gave birth to a child with fetal alcohol syndrome? Probably not, that would be discriminatory.
The sad thing is that it won't even have to go through the courts. An out-of-control judiciary might okay a regulation that mandates serving alcohol to pregnant women. Isn't that what happened to allow perverts to use Women's Bathrooms?
Hmmmmn.
But the CITY of New York CAN (and MUST) demand ALL NYC people be prohibited from drinking “Big Gulps” of extremely fattening non-alcholic drinks, right?
The CITY of New York CAN (and MUST) require ALL smokers to go outside and get sick in the cold, wet and rain and snow and wind, right?
I am guessing that minority women in New York are more apt to drink alcohol when pregnant than whites thus it becomes a Dem civil right’s issue.
I think this is one of those things the government won’t be able to enforce. The barkeeps will continue to tell them to go somewhere else.
Bartenders Cant Refuse Pregnant Women Alcohol, New York City Says
If they can not refuse a pregnant women then how can they refuse anyone even someone that “appears” to have drunk too much?
This is actually a reasonable court decision. The woman is ultimately responsible for her own health, and that of her baby. Since when does society deputize bartenders to enforce a recommendation from some medical group? And besides... she’s sitting on the other side of a bar and unless she’s in her last couple of months who would know?
We need less blame-shifting, not more.
When the law of man predominates, you eventually get laws that are sheer insanity
I disagree. This is an intrusion of the courts into a private matter.
The bartender has the Constitutional right to serve, or refuse service, to anyone for any reason or for no reason at all. (Freedom of assembly also includes the freedom to not assemble at all!!) What CONSTITUTIONAL authority does any court have to FORCE the bartender to assemble with a pregnant woman in a PRIVATE establishment?
EVERY anti-discrimination law is un-Constitutional.
The problem is that even though they are being forced to serve pregnant women, there is no doubt that if one has problems with the birth/baby, they can sue the establishment of their choice for serving them alcohol.....
Liquor, yes. 32 ounce soda, no.
Being a progressive means being able to hold mutually incompatible positions simultaneously.
It’s gender discrimination, women are singled out. That’s their logic, read the ordinance in the original post.
It’s mind blowing that NYC will micromanage every aspect of the populations life because they know whats best. But when it comes to a developing baby, we can’t discriminate against women. It could possibly hurt someone’s feelings by being judged and singled out by a bartender. Can’t have that.
Hey, doesn't that make it "settled science?"
Maybe the bartenders don’t want to be targeted with suits when the babies are born with fetal alcohol. They have the right to protect themselves from being the target of suits to provide support for those babies or from being charged with harming the infants. Is the State going to indemnify them or is it an unfunded mandate?
Smoking is a different issue because the smoker is inflicting the smoke on others. In the case of drinking, the alcohol only goes into the bloodstream of the drinker. (And of the baby within, if the drinker is pregnant.)
As long as they can’t sue if the kid is born with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, I’m fine with it.
Card the kid, no ID? not 21?
NO DRINK.
Bartenders reserve the right to refuse unruly customers.
Bars can be sued hen a driver wrecks his or her car. I could see a father or child suing an establishment over fetal alcohol impairment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.