Well someone finally did it! Someone took Muslims to a HRC

[The_Squid]

If I remember correctly, in the issue of Christian B&B owners they offered to find the couple another room and still lost their case. This is why HRC's are absolute BS.

I think that this is a different situation. The barber shop was going to giver her a haircut. The gay couple were not being allowed to stay there.

Should the religious owners of businesses be allowed to discriminate against atheists? "Catholic only" b&b is OK?

I think that the case against the b&b owners had broader implications than this particular case.

[Boges]

I think that this is a different situation. The barber shop was going to giver her a haircut. The gay couple were not being allowed to stay there.

Should the religious owners of businesses be allowed to discriminate against atheists? "Catholic only" b&b is OK?

I think that the case against the b&b owners had broader implications than this particular case.

Really? Because as Canukistani points out, what about Muslim doctors, Dentists etc. Can they also deny service to women not in their family?

Edited November 15, 2012 by Boges

[guyser]

What has happened to my country.

Too many whinners born here !

Muslims are the biggest bullshitting whinners going on the planet ,always a excuse

You sure about that? Biggest whiner around here is.....um....wanna guess?

. We need to stop this shit before real canadians have no rights left in this country.

Ohhhh please tell us what they look like?

This shit has gone on long enough, time for people to move where their culture is fully accepted, instead of moving to here and then shoving thier way down our throats.Unfortunitly some canadians don't have the balls to stand up for thier country in case they might offend someone.

Im guessing that isnt the Ottawa Valley, Too many whinners !

[Michael Hardner]

Christians were taken to a HRC for refusing to serve a gay couple at a B&B. Also a man was taken to a HRC for not allowing a Transgendered person to join his Women's only gym. This case seems to follow those precedents.

You can't make up your own rules for what your religion is based on, though. There's nothing in Christianity that says you can't serve a gay couple at a B&B. If you don't like gays, then fine, but don't blame your religion for that. My family was always very religious and had gay friends, acquaintances and cherished their friendships.

[Michael Hardner]

One would think that a hair business open to the general public would have someone on the premises who could serve a female customer.

-k

But they don't have to. I can go to plenty of salons that don't serve women - gyms that don't allow men to attend - the list goes on and on.

Close call but the religious guy gets the prize.

[Michael Hardner]

This is interesting indeed. In the full article it mentions that she isn't seeking any money at all. I am of the opinion that a business should serve all public. targeting your business to one gender or another is fine but shouldn't be able to ban one gender over another.

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps. Calling my lawyer... right... now...

[Michael Hardner]

What has happened to my country. Muslims are the biggest bullshitting whinners going on the planet ,always a excuse. We need to stop this shit before real canadians have no rights left in this country. This shit has gone on long enough, time for people to move where their culture is fully accepted, instead of moving to here and then shoving thier way down our throats.Unfortunitly some canadians don't have the balls to stand up for thier country in case they might offend someone.

This thread is a blessing in that we can talk about an interesting issue of religious rights vs individual rights. Why do you want to sully it up with the anti-Muslim stuff? This case applies equally to Orthodox Jews, so please just squint your eyes wherever it says Muslim on here and read it as Jew.

Thanks.

[Merlin]

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps. Calling my lawyer... right... now...

I don't understand how this post of yours relates to my own post which you quoted sir.

[Michael Hardner]

targeting your business to one gender or another is fine but shouldn't be able to ban one gender over another.

My point is that business cater to gender specific goods and services sometimes. I grant you that they do not "ban" a gender as this service did, but gender targeting is definitely allowed - leaving out the religious rationalization.

[Merlin]

My point is that business cater to gender specific goods and services sometimes. I grant you that they do not "ban" a gender as this service did, but gender targeting is definitely allowed - leaving out the religious rationalization.

of course, of course. Businesses have target audiences no doubt about that but they shouldn't be banning people based on race, religion, sex etc.

[guyser]

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps.

Dont bother, they do sell large ones, however not your size.

[Canuckistani]

You can't make up your own rules for what your religion is based on, though. There's nothing in Christianity that says you can't serve a gay couple at a B&B. If you don't like gays, then fine, but don't blame your religion for that. My family was always very religious and had gay friends, acquaintances and cherished their friendships.

And is there an injunction that men can't touch strange women in the Koran. The face coverings for women are not in the Koran, they are a cultural issue. Many Muslims are like your family, they are willing to touch strange women, they're more relaxed about it. I do know the Old Testament is all about what abominations gays are, so for a devout person this may be sufficient religious reason to not serve gays. By your interpretation, there's very little in the bible that speaks about modern practices at all.

Personally I think discriminating against gays is stupid, but as long as we're going to allow people religious exemptions for certain kinds of discrimination, we have to grant that right to all religious people.

[Canuckistani]

My point is that business cater to gender specific goods and services sometimes. I grant you that they do not "ban" a gender as this service did, but gender targeting is definitely allowed - leaving out the religious rationalization.

Yes they do ban a gender, as women only gyms etc do.

[Canuckistani]

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps. Calling my lawyer... right... now...

Do you support Vic Secret not selling their stuff to men?

[Guest]

I don't see the comparison with Victoria's secret. Men buy stuff there all the time.

The woman wanted a man's cut.

A man at Victoria's secret buys women's underwear.

Unless the comparison is meant to bolster the woman's case?

[cybercoma]

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps. Calling my lawyer... right... now...

To make this closer to the OP, it would be like walking into Victoria's Secret and being told you're not allowed to buy women's underwear.

[cybercoma]

My point is that business cater to gender specific goods and services sometimes.

And she wanted a male-gendered haircut.

[cybercoma]

I don't see the comparison with Victoria's secret. Men buy stuff there all the time.

The woman wanted a man's cut.

A man at Victoria's secret buys women's underwear.

Unless the comparison is meant to bolster the woman's case?

Sorry for repeating you. I should have read the thread first.

[Guest]

Sorry for repeating you. I should have read the thread first.

No, I do that all the time...

[dre]

I'm suing Victoria's Secret because they don't sell jockstraps. Calling my lawyer... right... now...

Thats a poor analogy. This women did not want the shop to sell a product it didnt provide, she wanted a mens haircut.

A better analogy would be that you are suing Victoria Secret because they refuse to sell you womens underwear on the grounds that you are a man, and I suspect you might actually have a case there.

[Michael Hardner]

of course, of course. Businesses have target audiences no doubt about that but they shouldn't be banning people based on race, religion, sex etc.

If the shop offered to have somebody else cut her hair - which they supposedly did - then I'm ok with that option. I believe that the man shouldn't have to touch her if he doesn't want to.

[Michael Hardner]

Do you support Vic Secret not selling their stuff to men?

If a devout Muslim woman worked there and it was against her religion then sure. Are we in crazy supposition land yet ?

[Canuckistani]

If the shop offered to have somebody else cut her hair - which they supposedly did - then I'm ok with that option. I believe that the man shouldn't have to touch her if he doesn't want to.

Two months after she asked for the cut? The shop needs to put up a sign saying women cut by appointment only. But again, if gyms can discriminate, why can't these guys?

[Michael Hardner]

To make this closer to the OP, it would be like walking into Victoria's Secret and being told you're not allowed to buy women's underwear.

Right. Do cases like that happen ? Maybe they do.

[Canuckistani]

Right. Do cases like that happen ? Maybe they do.

No they don't, and that's the point.