Tennessee Store Puts Up "No Gays Allowed" Sign - and It Is Perfectly Legal

[c.d.]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-tennessee-store-put-up-a-no-gays-allowed-sign-%E2%80%94-and-its-totally-legal/ar-AAcqKTG

c.d.

[GUT]

I am pretty sure I'll be in the minority but I have no problem with it.

If someone owns a business they should be allowed to say who they will and won't deal with. I work in a profession where I have to take on any client who will pay my fees regardless of how repulsive I may find their actions, and can assure you that at times I'd rather not.

Now the business may go under, but that is the risk they take.

[Pcdunn]

I am pretty sure I'll be in the minority but I have no problem with it.

If someone owns a business they should be allowed to say who they will and won't deal with. I work in a profession where I have to take on any client who will pay my fees regardless of how repulsive I may find their actions, and can assure you that at times I'd rather not.

Now the business may go under, but that is the risk they take.

Well, a business owner does have the right to refuse service to anyone, but that was probably intended to keep out rowdy drunks, or people improperly dressed.

We discussed this similar issue on anothet forum, and part of the question is -- how do you tell they're gay? Many are not obvious about it. No one wears pink armbands. Maybe a bakery asked to make a cake with two "groom" figures atop it would get a clue, but a dry cleaners? Really?? "I'm sorry, your wardrobe is far too "gay" for my taste, and I'd like you to take your business elsewhere, as your money may be contaminated!" Yeah, let's see how well that goes for them.

[GUT]

Well, a business owner does have the right to refuse service to anyone, but that was probably intended to keep out rowdy drunks, or people improperly dressed.

We discussed this similar issue on anothet forum, and part of the question is -- how do you tell they're gay? Many are not obvious about it. No one wears pink armbands. Maybe a bakery asked to make a cake with two "groom" figures atop it would get a clue, but a dry cleaners? Really?? "I'm sorry, your wardrobe is far too "gay" for my taste, and I'd like you to take your business elsewhere, as your money may be contaminated!" Yeah, let's see how well that goes for them.

That's the risk they take.

[Robert]

I too am one of those who think that a private business should be allowed to serve/employ or not serve/employ whomever they wish. If they want to actually lose money by turning away custom, or employing person A when person B would be better, it's up to them, though if it's a large company the shareholders might have a word or two to say about it.

[Errata]

We discussed this similar issue on anothet forum, and part of the question is -- how do you tell they're gay? Many are not obvious about it. No one wears pink armbands. Maybe a bakery asked to make a cake with two "groom" figures atop it would get a clue, but a dry cleaners? Really?? "I'm sorry, your wardrobe is far too "gay" for my taste, and I'd like you to take your business elsewhere, as your money may be contaminated!" Yeah, let's see how well that goes for them.

So far about a dozen gay people have been in there and he hasn't thrown them out. Either he hasn't clocked them or he never had any intention of enforcing the sign.

[Mayerling]

I am pretty sure I'll be in the minority but I have no problem with it.

If someone owns a business they should be allowed to say who they will and won't deal with. I work in a profession where I have to take on any client who will pay my fees regardless of how repulsive I may find their actions, and can assure you that at times I'd rather not.

Now the business may go under, but that is the risk they take.

G'Day GUT,

Theoretically you are right - a private business can refuse to serve people for any reason, no matter how it may outrage the rest of us. In fact, I wonder how outraged if the sign said "We won't serve any members of the Oddfellows" or something like that. The Oddfellows might feel hurt though.

Having gone to law school I know what you are referring to regarding accepting briefs. But one can get out from this if the relationship with the party you represent gets impossible (the party will not listen to what you suggest in the form of defense moves, or takes a dislike to you). Then it becomes if the judge on the case (we're talking about the U.S. here) will accept the problem as grounds to allow you to leave. if it is in the initial stages the judge probably will allow it - but the closer one gets to the trial period, the judge really can't see changing lawyers so late. Of course if the cause is a collapse of the attorney/barrister's health, that probably would be severe enough for the judge to agree to the changing of the representing attorney/barrister.

Jeff

[Robert]

It can also happen, can it not, if the defendant confesses his guilt to his defence barrister? Mind you, since there would probably be no witnesses, I don't know what would happen if the defendant denied the confession.

[GUT]

It can also happen, can it not, if the defendant confesses his guilt to his defence barrister? Mind you, since there would probably be no witnesses, I don't know what would happen if the defendant denied the confession.

There are numerous circumstances where counsel can cease to act. However finding the client offensive isn't one of them.

And no a confession isn't strictly one of them, unless he insists on pleading not guilty after said confession.

If he admits the crime and pleads guilty you still have an obligation to act for him on sentence and argue for the best possible outcome there (at least in Aus and UK).

But remember you get some pretty unpleasant punters in matters other than Criminal cases. Think of the slum landlord evicting tenants, the father or mother in Family Law that you honestly believe the child would be better off not being within 100 miles of. But you still have to act for them.

[c.d.]

If I ever open up a store, I think I'll put up a sign that says "we don't serve religious ***holes."

It seems this pastor is rather selective. Why not exclude liars, divorced people, adulterers, thieves, drunkards and people who do not attend church regularly as well?

c.d.

[GUT]

If I ever open up a store, I think I'll put up a sign that says "we don't serve religious ***holes."

It seems this pastor is rather selective. Why not exclude liars, divorced people, adulterers, thieves, drunkards and people who do not attend church regularly as well?

c.d.

If he was consistent he should.

And of course you would be entitled to not serve the religious if you chose to. Now how you would identify them is another question.

[c.d.]

Well the truly religious are so few in numbers and I have no problem with them at all. Identifying religious ***holes would seem to be pretty easy. Just look at what they say and how they act.

c.d.

[Robert]

Of course you should be allowed to refuse to serve religious people in your shop, CD. Or people with a mole on their chin. Or people whose eyes you deem to be too close together. That's because it's your shop.

[Mayerling]

If I ever open up a store, I think I'll put up a sign that says "we don't serve religious ***holes."

It seems this pastor is rather selective. Why not exclude liars, divorced people, adulterers, thieves, drunkards and people who do not attend church regularly as well?

c.d.

Hi c.d.,
'
How about including those bad people who gather sticks for firewood on the Sabbath - it would be a relief to them for a storeowner to refuse to serve them, as the Old Testament says they must be stoned to death.

And let us not forget those who say "J***v*h" publicly. Remember "The Life of Brian"?

Jeff

[c.d.]

And also those people who wear clothes made out of two different kinds of material like cotton and nylon.

And although there is no Biblical restriction against it, from my own personal perspective, I would include those people who wear stripes and checks at the same time. I run a tight ship.

c.d.