Posted on 06/25/2018 5:05:16 AM PDT by Pinkbell
1. Most states ban most businesses from discriminating against clients based on the clients’ race, religion, sex or national origin. Federal law does the same, though for a narrower set of businesses (and doesn’t cover sex discrimination); it also adds a ban on disability discrimination. Many states and some cities also ban discrimination based on sexual orientation, marital status and various other attributes.
But political affiliation is rarely on the list. A few cities or counties do ban such discrimination. D.C. bans discrimination based on “the state of belonging to or endorsing any political party.” Seattle bans such discrimination based on “any idea or belief, or coordinated body of ideas or beliefs, relating to the purpose, conduct, organization, function or basis of government and related institutions and activities, whether or not characteristic of any political party or group,” “includ[ing] membership in a political party or group and includ[ing] conduct, reasonably related to political ideology, which does not interfere with job performance.” There are a few other places on this list. But New Mexico doesn’t ban such discrimination in public accommodations, and neither do the city of Albuquerque or Bernalillo County.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/25/can-businesses-refuse-to-serve-or-employ-trump-supporters/?utm_term=.779f521bdd92
Give it a rest. It’s late. Kicking any group out of a restaurant for no good reason is a dirty thing to do.
I don’t like it either, but the law in most areas and federally does not cover political discrimination. If this becomes an issue in this country across both sides of the aisle, perhaps change will be a discussion.
Please clap.
This is not the same thing. The baker was willing to serve the gay couple. He just didn’t feel comfortable doing a gay wedding because it violates his religious beliefs. He also doesn’t do Halloween cakes because celebration of Halloween is against his religion.
The restaurant refused to serve Sarah outright. If it was to be a similar situation, the restaurant would serve Sarah but would have the right to decline if Sarah asked them to cater or host an event for the White House.
Only in a few areas such as D.C., Seattle, and California is it protected. We all disagree with what she did and think it’s wrong to do it to anyone. The issue is if it is legal or not, and it is.
I’m not saying it isn’t. I’m just saying it’s legal. There’s a big distinction.
Show me how.
First, I doubt a conservative establishment would have been rude to an Obama official, because they would realize the Left would burn them to the ground. Second, Obama AND every Dem and media personality WOULD have made an issue of it.
Being polite was tried for decades. All it accomplished was to make it safe for them to spit on us. Literally.
No more being nice.
It’s not legal to follow them around to other establishments screaming and yelling imo that’s harassment. Do these people have a permit to protest outside of other places?
A Certified PUBLIC Accountant is also licensed to serve the public. What makes this person any different than a restaurant owner, when it comes to so-called “civil rights” laws?
I love he came to the defense of his folks - why protect leftist scum?
I didn’t know that when I wrote my post, but that adds a whole new layer to it. To go to those extremes is wrong, and it should be illegal for a business to harass a private citizen they have thrown out of their business. These people are beyond unethical.
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.