I reposted a George Takei comment on FB about what is going on in Arizona, to which one of my husband's friends asked: What happened to "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"

I know there are laws against discrimination in business but don't know enough to give this guy a short answer on why his POV is wrong. What should I answer? Someone here has to know more about the law than I do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2014 07:14PM by CA girl.

"We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"


So do your customers...

If it can be proven that you refused service based on that person's membership in a "protected class", and if you can be considered a "public accomodation", then you might be found guilty of violating someone's civil rights, or you may be sued.

^^This^^

That's a good question CA girl.

Unfortunately I don't know anything about state law in AZ,

I know in my home state of Washington refusing service to people based on their race, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation, and a few other things is explicitly illegal.

I believe there are federal laws which are much the same though I don't know if they apply to services provided by vendors or not.

"we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" is a useless nonsensical sign that attempts to establish a "right" that doesn't exist. Open a store, hang one of those signs on your door, and then kick out all of the minorities for having filthy colored skin and see what happens. You'll find out exactly how many "rights" you don't have.

There's really no question about this so-called "freedom of religion" idea. Just an excuse to discriminate against gays, that's all. Here's two scenarios to illustrate;

1) An atheist. Would they refuse service to an atheist?? Obviously this has been done and established as unlawful.

2) Blacks. Just a few short decades ago, discrimination against blacks was justified EXACTLY the same way they want to discriminate against gays.. i.e. The Bible. Everyone in those days knew blacks were cursed with the so-called mark of Cain. It sez so in mah bybull! When will we make this asshat despicable book, worth no more than Harry Potter to guide one's life by? Written by a bunch of savage bronze-age goatherders. I hate that book.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2014 07:32PM by rationalist01.

This just burns me up!

It IS discrimination, plain and simple. I'm a heterosexual, and I would boycott ANY business that refused service based on sexual orientation.

So would I - it's outrageous.

....and the law has the right to prosecute you if you refuse service to certain people.

And what happened to the article of faith that say's you sustain the laws of the land......disriminating against prtected classes of people is against the law.

This guy really has no leg to stand on.

My TBM husband finds that AZ law appalling. Even him!

This thing is a very stupid idea...does anyone know how this came about?

Didn't that saying go away with the "Whites only" drinking fountain signs? I would have only expected to see it behind old chairs in junk shops at this point.

I believe if someone posts that sign they should be required to post the reasons for refusing service and be specific about who they are refusing--preferably in Neon. I like to see bigotry lit and spotlighted.

BUT . . . I do think there is a gray area to consider. Say for instance you have a business which makes crosses and the Grand Dragon from the KKK orders a dozen. What then?

I would love to see a big movement in Arizona where businesses posted signs that said "Everyone Welcome." I like to think there would be a surprising number, and I know they would make the bigots look like what they are. I would have to post "Everyone Welcome Who Behaves" though if I had a business there. :)

and even appropriate, as long as you aren't refusing service based on membership in a protected class.
I have seen a gun shop owner refuse service to a young male with saggy pants and a "gansta" look to him.
The owner just pointed and said "GET OUT". LOL
Totally appropriate.

Good points. I'm getting so tired of having to legislate every little bit of our lives. Luckily we have the internet, and the media, and bigotry gets spotlighted as a nation grows ever more tolerant.

"Here's the thing about rights. They're not supposed to be voted on. That's why they are called rights." Rachel Maddow.

Is a protected class just a general term for 'religion, sex, race, etc.'

or are there specific 'classes' mentioned - meaning it's not OK to refuse service because someone is black, or Jewish, but it is OK to refuse service to someone who isn't a member of a protected class?

And it is also the reason why gays fought so hard for protected class status.

I think the better way is to define when a public accommodation business can discriminate against someone. Things like viloation of laws, health codes, trying to disrupt the business, threatening other customers, etc..

What BadGirl said.

The thing about rights, all rights, is that they have limits. It is an amazingly difficult thing to get some people to accept this concept. In theory, at least, in our society, rights should not be pursued to the point that they hurt others.

The basic summary that I was given in school is:

"Your right to swing your fist stops where the other person's nose begins."

If you choose to set yourself up in business >in a public accommodation<, you can deny service to all sorts of folks who verifiably would harm your business or your other customers. Like someone who is dripping filth. Or someone who is loud and abusive. But your right is limited, just like all other rights are limited. >In a public accommodation< you are not allowed to refuse service to someone just because you don't like the person's religion. Or skin color. Or, ideally, who that person sleeps with at home in private.

No one is required to set themselves up in a public accommodation. But when people choose to do this, they take on a certain set of restraints in how they can run their public accommodation business.

In a private situation, like a private club, things are different. You can legally exclude a much wider range of people, just because you want to. If you want to. And if your club members will let you get away with it. But even there, there are still a basic rules that you must follow --- you know, no rats in the food storage, no sexual molestation. There are always limits to every right.

Ok, just playing devil's advocate here because I'm curious and not well versed in particulars of the law . . .

What if someone walked into a store and was filthy and you wanted to refuse service for that reason (driving other customers away). Later, this person claims discrimination on the basis of religious intolerance (or something).


Does the customer have a claim?

He would not have a legitimate claim, but with the right lawyer he could still make a claim and get somewhere. Happens every day.

Hopefully there would be security cameras to show what really happened or a few witnesses, but otherwise even a false claim becomes a "he said/she said" situation and a lie can get you a settlement. Its not about right or wrong, it's about your insurance company's RIGHT to settle as the most cost effective solution.

I reposted George Takei's photo from this morning, my Ultra TBM SIL told me it was a logical fallacy. Head in the sand it seems.

Some possible answers:

"You can refuse service to anyone, just not for any reason." with a possible continuation "If you have the right reason, you can refuse service to anyone".

"It went out with the signs that say 'whites' only".

"So, you think it is OK for a person to refuse service to blacks? Is that what you are advocating?"

Or you could show them this:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/21/roccos-little-chicago-pizzeria-arizona-anti-gay_n_4830936.html

And say "There is a way to exclude anyone. Would you want to be excluded the way Blacks were excluded in the 50s?"

Just some thoughts...

Employers are not allowed to ask sexual orientation in interviews. Nor can they legally fire you for being gay/lesbian. But, it's okay to turn away paying customers for being homosexual? Someone has their head up their @ss.

As Al Sharpton said, didn't we already have this debate in the sixties?

You cannot categorically ban a class of people for race, religion, etc. Refusal of service is for what people do, not who they are. It also should be justifiable for business reasons, like not allowing children in a theatre or requiring shoes.