|
laeva recumbens anguis
Cable Forum Team
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 68
Services: Premiere Collection
Posts: 43,650
|
Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
He is not in trouble.
Fancy that, all the cake shops in America and they went to that one asking for a cake... They knew what they were fecking doing.
A shop owner has the right to refuse service, to any person, for any reason or no reason. The Supreme court upheld his appeal early this year when he refused to bake a cake for a gay couple because it was against his religious beliefs. Now that this test has passed in the Supreme Court, the highest Court in the land, he could get substantial damages when he sues for "targeted harassment".
|
Actually, they can't...
https://businessadvocatelaw.com/lawy...er_bl26152.htm
Quote:
The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to “full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”
The right of public accommodation is also guaranteed to disabled citizens under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which precludes discrimination by businesses on the basis of disability.
In addition to these federal protections, many states also protect people from discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation or other personal attributes.
Second, putting up a sign does not create the right to refuse service; the right exists, but you must be careful about when you exercise it. When a customer is not a member of a federally protected class, you can generally deny service so long as you have a legitimate business reason. Some reasons that have been found to be legitimate include:
When a customer is not properly dressed. Hence the other common sign, “No shirt, no shoes, no service.”
When a customer has poor hygiene, such as extreme body odor or being excessively dirty.
When a customer is being disruptive. This includes customers that are intoxicated.
When a customer harasses your employees or other customers.
When there are safety concerns, such as when there are too many people to serve.
If you are certain a customer cannot or will not pay.
When a customer comes in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed.
Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers who wish to stay on premises.
Even the most compelling business reason cannot overcome obvious discrimination. Legitimate reasons for denying service cannot be used as a shield when the actual reason for the refusal of service is discrimination.
|
You said
Quote:
|
The Supreme court upheld his appeal early this year when he refused to bake a cake for a gay couple because it was against his religious beliefs.
|
No, the Supreme Court didn't decide for him on the basis of his religious beliefs, they decided for him because the Colorado Court had shown "hostility" towards him.
Quote:
|
As the record shows, some of the commissioners at the Commission’s formal, public hearings endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable and characterized it as merely rhetorical, and compared his invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling or disavowed in the briefs filed here. The comments thus cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.
|
Quote:
the Supreme Court ruling also specifically defends the rights of gay Americans. “Our society has come to the recognition that gay persons and gay couples cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth,” the majority opinion says.
While religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected under the First Amendment, the court warns, “It is a general rule that such objections do not allow business owners and other actors in the economy and in society to deny protected persons equal access to goods and services.”
Exceptions to the anti-discrimination rule, it adds, must be strictly limited:
Yet if that exception were not confined, then a long list of persons who provide goods and services for marriages and weddings might refuse to do so for gay persons, thus resulting in a community-wide stigma inconsistent with the history and dynamics of civil rights laws that ensure equal access to goods, services, and public accommodations.
The court noted that Phillips’ exemption from anti-discrimination laws will not be broadly applicable in the future
|
__________________
Thank you for calling the Abyss.
If you have called to scream, please press 1 to be transferred to the Void, or press 2 to begin your stare.
If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
|