4 ms·

Sounds like a private enterprise deciding what they want on their property, to me.

by msbarnett 6y ago

andrenth 6y ago
So like, say, a cake shop?
- msbarnett 6y ago
  Sure, exactly like that. People who believe there’s a vast conspiracy of celebrities to drain “adrenochrome” from children to gain eternal life or whatever aren’t a protected class, after all.
  - andrenth 6y ago
    You’re saying a private company is allowed to decide who they want on their property. This must hold for all private companies, no?
    - msbarnett 6y ago
      Yes, provided they are not deciding on the basis of someone belonging to a protected class. Hence a cake maker can cheerfully refuse your business on the basis of you wanting a cake that says “Jennifer Garner Eats Babies” but not on the basis of you, say, being homosexual, or Black.
      - andrenth 6y ago
        That means I can refuse servicing you based on, for example, the clothes you’re wearing, right? Or maybe because I don’t like your hair? As far as I know people with bad hair is not a protected class. I’m trying to figure out how do you know the basis on which some private enterprise decided to refuse to provide their service to someone. Is it based on their stated reason?
        catalogia 6y ago
        For better or worse, many restaurants have dress codes.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        andrenth 6y ago
        But the restaurant is required to be consistent applying it, no? Can they refuse service because you’re not wearing a tie while simultaneously serving the guy in flip flops?
        krapp 6y ago
        >But the restaurant is required to be consistent applying it, no? IANAL but I don't think so. In the US at least, they can't be inconsistent in a way that correlates to persecuting a protected class (refusing service based on race for instance) but otherwise they have the right - often explicitly displayed on signage to patrons on entry - to be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
        c0nducktr 6y ago
        If that's the case, night clubs have been violating that rule for ages.
        msbarnett 6y ago
        > I’m trying to figure out how do you know the basis on which some private enterprise decided to refuse to provide their service to someone. If you’re trying to understand the basis by which courts figure this stuff out, what we’re talking about here is the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is civil law, and the evidentiary standard that applies is “preponderance of evidence”. The businesses’ stated reason is certainly one piece of evidence that courts weigh, but it’s far from the only one. If you refuse me business based on what I’m wearing, but I can show you regular do business with people wearing the same thing, or I can demonstrate a preponderance of evidence that you knew I was homosexual and had made statements to the effect that you would refuse to serve homosexuals, courts aren’t going to just take you at your word.

Sounds like a private enterprise deciding what they want on their property, to me.

andrenth 6y ago

So like, say, a cake shop?

msbarnett 6y ago
Sure, exactly like that. People who believe there’s a vast conspiracy of celebrities to drain “adrenochrome” from children to gain eternal life or whatever aren’t a protected class, after all.
- andrenth 6y ago
  You’re saying a private company is allowed to decide who they want on their property. This must hold for all private companies, no?
  - msbarnett 6y ago
    Yes, provided they are not deciding on the basis of someone belonging to a protected class. Hence a cake maker can cheerfully refuse your business on the basis of you wanting a cake that says “Jennifer Garner Eats Babies” but not on the basis of you, say, being homosexual, or Black.
    - andrenth 6y ago
      That means I can refuse servicing you based on, for example, the clothes you’re wearing, right? Or maybe because I don’t like your hair? As far as I know people with bad hair is not a protected class. I’m trying to figure out how do you know the basis on which some private enterprise decided to refuse to provide their service to someone. Is it based on their stated reason?
      - catalogia 6y ago
        For better or worse, many restaurants have dress codes.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        andrenth 6y ago
        But the restaurant is required to be consistent applying it, no? Can they refuse service because you’re not wearing a tie while simultaneously serving the guy in flip flops?
        krapp 6y ago
        >But the restaurant is required to be consistent applying it, no? IANAL but I don't think so. In the US at least, they can't be inconsistent in a way that correlates to persecuting a protected class (refusing service based on race for instance) but otherwise they have the right - often explicitly displayed on signage to patrons on entry - to be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
        c0nducktr 6y ago
        If that's the case, night clubs have been violating that rule for ages.
      - msbarnett 6y ago
        > I’m trying to figure out how do you know the basis on which some private enterprise decided to refuse to provide their service to someone. If you’re trying to understand the basis by which courts figure this stuff out, what we’re talking about here is the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is civil law, and the evidentiary standard that applies is “preponderance of evidence”. The businesses’ stated reason is certainly one piece of evidence that courts weigh, but it’s far from the only one. If you refuse me business based on what I’m wearing, but I can show you regular do business with people wearing the same thing, or I can demonstrate a preponderance of evidence that you knew I was homosexual and had made statements to the effect that you would refuse to serve homosexuals, courts aren’t going to just take you at your word.