@poddster wrote:

Double standards.

 

You believe you have the right to be choosy but others are not allowed to be

 


There is a difference between being 'choosy' (may not want any people in your house who have a habit of being drunk and loud, may not want any relatives/in-laws visiting who are nasty types) and discriminating against groups of people.

 

 

In Australia, it is unlawful to discriminate on the basis of age, disability, race and sex.

 

HRC

The way it was explained to me, by the Grove City Police, who convienced about a half a dozon businesses to trespass me, umm, Walmart, Meijer, a laundrymat, family dollar, kmart, kroger, that i know about anyway, any store owner or manager, or employee, can ban anyone for any reason or no reason at all. They need not even explain why your trespassed from the establishment.

 

Quote- "if you get trespassed from any store in a shopping center, you will be arrested if we see you at any store in that shopping center, or if we get a call and find you in the area"

 

The family dollar was in the same shopping center with the BMV, guess I can't renew my car tags or driver's liscense. least not in Grove City. It stands to reason that if the reason they deny service is not a good one, they would eather lie giving a fake reason, or not offer any reason at all. As the cop told me they don't need to give a reason.

 

 

.

Fun Factor : Now you have a choice in chat, factor that


@poddster wrote:

Are you advocating that homosexuals should have the right to enter an establishmet that the propritor has put off limits to them?

 

Yes

 

What about the rights of the propritor to exclude any group he wishes from his establishment?

 

It shouldn't exist - unless they could be deemed to pose a threat to him or his customers. (and in Australia it doen't exist.)

 

 


 

So, am3, can you detail for me and to everyone else where the dividing line being "choosy" and being discriminatory is. A legal definition would be just fine 🙂

 

 

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

ele, would you concede that bout customer and proprietor both have rights?

 

 

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Everybody Dance Now

 

Joono


@poddster wrote:

ele, would you concede that bout customer and proprietor both have rights?

 

 


Of course they do. The proprietoer has the right to buy and run his establishment without being discriminated against on the grounds of race, colour, religion or sex and the customer has the right to enter that establishment  without being discriminated against on any of those same grounds.

Both cuustomer and proprietor have an equal right to decide on any grounds they please whom  to invite itno their private homes. 

I have a feeling that this law will be changed, once the NCAA changes the Final Four venue from Indianapolis, and the Big 10 changes the conference football and basketball championships.  The one thing that speaks louder than"religious freedom" is money, and Indiana will lose millions.Once the NFL  started rethinking Arizona as aa site for the Super Bowl, Arizona vetoed a similar law.

Morally upright Christians.............don't you just love them?

Around the state, stickers touting “This business serves everyone” have been appearing in many businesses’ windows,   

 

I really cant imagine serious business people getting behind this law. A sale is a sale in business, who in their right mind is going to turn away customers? I have never met a business person who would turn customers away.  I personally think the average person whether religious or not really doesn't give a c*ap what way you swing,  (especially if you are a potential customer)  Most people treat people the way they expect to be treated, especially in business.