MAGA on Canada Day. Gotta vent

[CaptainCrunch]

1) You don't have a right to refuse service over a basic hat unless you are posting it. You also can't refuse right for trivial reasons because then restaurants for example would be legally able to ban any group that they want. The right to refuse service isn't as open ended and flexible as you seem to believe it is.



2) Because right now its just a damn hat.


3) Nope you're right, no one's making me do anything.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

You don't get how this works at all. Bakers don't have to bake gay wedding cakes. Florists don't have to sell gay flowers. There is no reason I can think of what so ever to serve, placate, or otherwise deal with anyone in a MAGA hat.

Except that these establishments in Canada for example seem to lose human rights challenges when they refuse service to groups.

the right of refusal is designed to basically enforce a dress code for a restaurant, or to get rid of unruly people.

Please show where this person was unruly, Restaurants are public spaces in that anyone can enter them and attend them unless its a private club, and the reason to deny service is based on the individual.

Like I said, and I'll leave it at that because this debate is really going to become fruitless. The Manager was fired because he acted against the policies of the restaurant. there's no indication the person wearing the hat was acting in any kind of manner that should have gotten him removed.

The MAGA isn't a banned symbol, the Republican Party isn't a banned hate group.

If this was about a guy walking in with a Nazi hate, or a Aryan Nations hate, acting like an idiot and swearing at minorities then ban away.

If you want to as a restaurant or club or whatever make a statement then post up, no Mericans allowed, or no Trump Supporters allowed, or no Trump Paraphernalia involved.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

1) You don't have a right to refuse service over a basic hat unless you are posting it. You also can't refuse right for trivial reasons because then restaurants for example would be legally able to ban any group that they want. The right to refuse service isn't as open ended and flexible as you seem to believe it is.

What laws are stopping a restaurant from banning anyone? You’re stating that a restaurant can’t refuse service for trivial reasons, back that up with some substance. Outside of public backlash there really is nothing to stop a restaurant from banning an individual or group of individuals from their business.

2) Because right now its just a damn hat.

A hat that supports very questionable policies and ideals.

3) Nope you're right, no one's making me do anything.

Well at least we can agree on that

[CaptainCrunch]

So in fact by what you're saying, you'd be fine with restuarants throwing out minorities and members of the gay community?



No handicapped people allowed?


Just curious because your applying a blanket statement here.


do you know what this man supports, he wasn't making a point of it in the restaurant that he was thrown out of. Maybe to him it was just a hat, maybe it was a clothing choice. Maybe he's a toxic ahole that supports all of trumps noxious policies, but we don't know that because all he did was go into a restaurant for food.

[Scroopy Noopers]

If someone is wearing a hat at all at the table eating they should get kicked out. Who raised these people!?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I’ll be honest that it disturbs me how upset the OP could get about something like this. It just shows that we really aren’t moving forward as a society.

It disturbs me that anyone would be disturbed by someone being upset because their neighbor is a homophobic racist POS.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

So in fact by what you're saying, you'd be fine with restuarants throwing out minorities and members of the gay community?



No handicapped people allowed?


Just curious because your applying a blanket statement here.


do you know what this man supports, he wasn't making a point of it in the restaurant that he was thrown out of. Maybe to him it was just a hat, maybe it was a clothing choice. Maybe he's a toxic ahole that supports all of trumps noxious policies, but we don't know that because all he did was go into a restaurant for food.

Those would be human rights violations, so no I would not suppport that.

If MAGA hat guy really wants to eat at that restaurant he can, he just needs to take off the hat. Minorities, homosexuals and handicap people wouldn’t have that option. I’m sorry if you can’t see the difference.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

1) You don't have a right to refuse service over a basic hat unless you are posting it. You also can't refuse right for trivial reasons because then restaurants for example would be legally able to ban any group that they want. The right to refuse service isn't as open ended and flexible as you seem to believe it is...

Except that these establishments in Canada for example seem to lose human rights challenges when they refuse service to groups.

Restaurants can refuse service for trivial reasons, including because of a hat, if they like. I don't know where you would get the opposite impression. There's no analogy with refusing services to - for example - people based on race or handicap, because those things are protected by human rights legislation. Your ability to wear whatever hat you may wish is not. Were you under the impression that it was illegal for restaurants to impose a dress code?

Seriously, you're saying this stuff as if you have some authority for it. What is your basis for these statements?

[CaptainCrunch]

Nope I personally have no authority, I zinged my brother in law who has run several establishment in the city, and he's on the side that the fired manager was in the wrong here and evicting the patron with the hat went against the policies of the restaurant. Evicting a guy for a clothing item who's not acting out of the ordinary if you haven't established a dress code will get you fired.





Anyways, I'm not going to debate this anymore. Its not that good of a topic.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Restaurants can refuse service for trivial reasons, including because of a hat, if they like. I don't know where you would get the opposite impression. There's no analogy with refusing services to - for example - people based on race or handicap, because those things are protected by human rights legislation. Your ability to wear whatever hat you may wish is not. Were you under the impression that it was illegal for restaurants to impose a dress code?

Seriously, you're saying this stuff as if you have some authority for it. What is your basis for these statements?

Exactly. The main reason they don’t kick people out for trivial reasons is because it’s bad for business. And the notion that they are a “public space” is so far off base it’s making my head spin.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Nope I personally have no authority, I zinged my brother in law who has run several establishment in the city, and he's on the side that the fired manager was in the wrong here and evicting the patron with the hat went against the policies of the restaurant. Evicting a guy for a clothing item who's not acting out of the ordinary if you haven't established a dress code will get you fired.

Sure, I have no difficulty believing that this is a common restaurant policy, but that's up to the restaurant in question to decide. It's not a legal matter, it's a business decision, and it appears that this restaurant made the same business decision by firing the manager in question - which, again, it is perfectly within its rights to do. However, they could just as well have said, "no, we side with our manager, Trump supporters aren't welcome here", if they'd wanted to. Just a question of what they think is better for their bottom line.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Nope I personally have no authority, I zinged my brother in law who has run several establishment in the city, and he's on the side that the fired manager was in the wrong here and evicting the patron with the hat went against the policies of the restaurant. Evicting a guy for a clothing item who's not acting out of the ordinary if you haven't established a dress code will get you fired.

The reason the manager got fired is because they made a decision the owner did not agree with. If the owner had made the decision or given the directive to not allow people to wear MAGA hats in the establishment there would be no recourse for the individual wearing the hat.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

It disturbs me that anyone would be disturbed by someone being upset because their neighbor is a homophobic racist POS.

But if I pretend it’s all just about a hat and ignore those key details I can comment about how the OP is one not moving society forward.

Death to relevant facts! Long live whatever point I’m making that would be made irrelevant by them!

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

It disturbs me that anyone would be disturbed by someone being upset because their neighbor is a homophobic racist POS.

I think most people (including me before my post) didn't read the whole thread.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I’ll be honest that it disturbs me how upset the OP could get about something like this. It just shows that we really aren’t moving forward as a society.

Tolerance is a one way street for some.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by zamler

Tolerance is a one way street for some.

...

The paradox of tolerance was described by Karl Popper in 1945. The paradox states that if a society is tolerant without limit, their ability to be tolerant will eventually be seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Popper came to the seemingly paradoxical conclusion that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

It seems like the people most likely to advocate for the tolerance of intolerance, are in fact, intolerant.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You always post that meme as if it's axiomatic, and it's always such a terribly misguided appeal to authority. Hell, it doesn't even need to apply in this case. The concept of tolerance doesn't apply to bad ideas. No idea is above the most exacting scrutiny.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You always post that meme as if it's axiomatic, and it's always such a terribly misguided appeal to authority. Hell, it doesn't even need to apply in this case. The concept of tolerance doesn't apply to bad ideas. No idea is above the most exacting scrutiny.

...

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Grandma apparently needs to read The Selfish Gene.

[PepsiFree]

First Wikipedia is a meme, then I’m supposed to reach out the the grandma in an actual meme and tell her to read a book.

Corsi’s internet is a fascinating place.