jacee Posted May 6, 2015 Report Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) Ah ... Bryan and Hydraboss ... my two favourite sore losers consoling one another. Sweet! Edited May 6, 2015 by jacee Quote
jacee Posted May 6, 2015 Report Posted May 6, 2015 This may have been mentioned earlier, ever have a an interview when trying to find a new family doctor? I have, smokers weren't welcome, other people have too, some turned down for being too old, here in Canada. I wouldn't say it's the right thing to do, but it happens. Discriminatory? http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=309fc048-8b96-4c21-8812-da393bdfb663 Your link isn't going to a relevant article, poochy. No, smokers don't have such protection. Interesting though ... I wonder if such doctors also refuse to treat other high-risk populations ... and why does it matter to them? It's all money in the bank for them. . Quote
eyeball Posted May 6, 2015 Report Posted May 6, 2015 People need to be less prejudiced and more discriminating about what's really at issue. You can decide to politely not offer a host/hostess a job but you'd be in trouble if your ad or sign said fat and ugly people need not apply. So what a business can't do is be deliberately and obviously bigoted towards the public. As for religious bigotry, I think any deity that needs its followers to have a legally enshrined right to discriminate should be required to apply to a government for a special permit to do so. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
guyser Posted May 6, 2015 Report Posted May 6, 2015 The answers are already in this thread multiple times. I'm not falling for your troll bait. Do your own homework.So I took you up on your 'homework' thing. Went back over this whole thread. And no, you offer nothing like you suggest you 'listed' ***, so the statement, "thanks for the non answer' stands. Troll bait? Your the one in here claiming BS thanks, and no , one cannot discriminate (although many try) when dealing in a public business. *** Hopefully not to claim you put forth the idiotic female gym idea thats been denounced. Quote
jacee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Really? Restaurant hostesses aren't hired for their attractiveness? Not much of what you're saying is specifically about the topic of this thread either. I was just responding to your narrow-minded nonsense. We aren't talking about hiring. <sigh> The thread is about a business serving the general public but refusing to serve a gay couple. You gave no relevant examples. . Quote
cybercoma Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 But clubs, societies, and associations discriminate! Quote
Bryan Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Went back over this whole thread. Obviously not. If you had, you'd have a list. *** Hopefully not to claim you put forth the idiotic female gym idea thats been denounced. If you really "went back through the whole thread" you know that other people raised that point, not me. But since you're actually talking about something specific this time, I'll address it: You can "denounce" the gender discrimination all you want, it still completely voids your entire argument because it's true whether you like it or not. If you really read the thread, you'd also know that I did comment on the attempts to dismiss the point by trying to claim that gyms aren't open to the public. Like I said, it's a distinction without a difference. They absolutely are open to the public, anyone can walk in and pay to use the treadmill without buying a membership. Pay for a wedding, pay for a workout, it's all serving the public. Quote
Bryan Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 We aren't talking about hiring. <sigh> The thread is about a business serving the general public but refusing to serve a gay couple. You gave no relevant examples. . Those same businesses that are really picky about the appearance of their staff are often also picky about the appearance of their clientelle. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" is just a starting point, some are even pickier than that. And it's perfectly fine for them to do so. Quote
jacee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Those same businesses that are really picky about the appearance of their staff are often also picky about the appearance of their clientelle. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" is just a starting point, some are even pickier than that. And it's perfectly fine for them to do so.Give it up.You're just wrong, Bryan. . Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Give it up. You're just wrong, Bryan. . Why is he wrong ? Please keep the argument going - it's not enough to say somebody is 'wrong', it doesn't foment discussion. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
jacee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Why is he wrong ? Please keep the argument going - it's not enough to say somebody is 'wrong', it doesn't foment discussion.Check the thread, Michael. We've been over and over it, and it's over. . Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Check the thread, Michael. We've been over and over it, and it's over. . No - the point is that I don't have to check the thread. You should refer to what is wrong and why you think that. If the discussion is done, then there's no post to be made, no discussion to be had. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Give it up. You're just wrong, Bryan. . No he is not wrong....employers can legally discriminate against employees based on gender for workplace dress codes and grooming standards (e.g. length of hair). Other public accommodations can similarly discriminate quite legally. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Having a dress code is hardly gender discrimination. An Air Canada pilot is required to wear a uniform regardless of their gender. I think we are talking Canada here so I suggest a little study of section 15 of the charter will give some insight into how tightly discrimination is controlled here. Employers and businesses certainly can not discriminate based on gender, and many other things. One exception would be for instance, were the job required the wearing of a hard, hat but someone applying for the job had religious requirement to wear a turban. Quote
eyeball Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 (edited) Can business' discriminate? Yes. Can they discriminate with malice, bigotry and prejudice? Not without facing legal consequences. Edited May 7, 2015 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
jacee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 No - the point is that I don't have to check the thread. You should refer to what is wrong and why you think that. If the discussion is done, then there's no post to be made, no discussion to be had.It's over if he doesn't make any more bogus claims without supporting them.. Quote
jacee Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Can business' discriminate? Yes. Can they discriminate with malice, bigotry and prejudice? Not without facing legal consequences. True. . Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Businesses can legally discriminate based on gender....even in Canada. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted May 7, 2015 Report Posted May 7, 2015 Correct. Businesses just can't illegally discriminate...even in the US. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.