Yeah, but I can’t take off my IED vest. It’s kinda part of my religious belief, you know?
4 Likes
I think typically we liberal folk define “discrimination” as prejudice against individuals based on an inherent condition. Discriminating against someone because of his skin color is wrong. Discriminating against someone because of the profession he chose – e.g. attorney – is reasonable.
In the case of Trump supporters, presumably they made this unwise choice of their own free will. Of course, I suppose we’d have to listen if they insisted that their choice was a consequence of an inherent condition, such as mental illness or low IQ.
6 Likes
No Shirt
No Shoes
MAGA Hat
No Service
5 Likes
There’s a difference between discriminating against people based on their political beliefs and “discriminating against them” based on their choice to promote those beliefs via hat. Some religious denominations do require headwear for some adherents, no political parties do.
If the bartender looked you up on social media before serving you, I’d agree it’s icky/creepy. But you can’t necessarily wave your campaign placard in any establishment you want.
For me, it would be “fuck that bar.” I’m sure kicking a person out of your establishment for wearing a MAGA hat might get you a “fuck that bar/restaurant/cupcake shop” from some people. Presumably someone who doesn’t want to serve people wearing MAGA hats or “I’m with her” shirts is fine with others choosing not to come to their establishment.
14 Likes
Except it is long established that private enterprise can restrict speech or expression, and most times we’re good with it. I am much more likely to hang out on a well-moderated internet board over a free-for-all, for example.
Bars often place limits on the things you can wear, as a preventative for trouble. Several bars where I live will ask you to leave if you are wearing something that even looks like gang colours.
Given the established behaviour of many MAGA trumpeting folks, I can see a bar deciding that they want to refuse service. It’s entirely possible that they just have a “no visible politics” rule.
Do we know he wasn’t asked to remove the hat and refused because “it’s mah First Amendment right”? That’s another standard bar rule: refuse a request to comply with such a request and you will be escorted from the premises on the grounds that things are likely to escalate. As long as the request isn’t a threat to your personal safety, refusal to follow staff instructions in a bar is grounds for removal.
Nope, not really disturbed by this. The bar wasn’t saying he couldn’t have his political beliefs, simply that he couldn’t advertise them on the business premises.
15 Likes
One what? Do you mean something like a shirt listing the god given rights of some group? As long as those rights don’t include the abuse of others or the violent appropriation of property then it sounds like a fine religious shirt that one should not be allowed to discriminate against.
Why? Did you have a specific one in mind?
I don’t think you can compare a normal candidate with someone who said Nazis are very fine people. This is where distinction in your discrimination comes in to play. Reasonable people can see the difference between your normal every day corporatists democrat and an insane, disconnected, unhinged, loudmouth who installs people in to roles where they can destroy the institutions the people created in hopes of making this nation and the world a better place to live. So, I’d say the “I’m with her” may be something you might not like but to condemn someone for supporting a typical candidate is not comparable to someone who supports Trumps agenda of hate and divisiveness.
6 Likes
At the end of the day, it is private property. Unless there is a specific law preventing it, they are free to decide to not serve people. And the laws tend to be very specific about the kinds of “protected groups” that it is illegal to not serve in a “public accommodation.” Discriminating on other bases is okay. Freedom of association is also the freedom to NOT associate with people. Like freedom of speech, it is perfectly possible to use that freedom to prove that you are an asshole, but not every asshole move rises to the level of “it should be illegal”
6 Likes
Wearing a public statement of a controversial opinion in an establishment where any reasonable person would know it’s not going to go over well is intentionally provocative, inviting a disturbance of the peace. A MAGA hat in this context is similar to an act of public indecency, not an instance of protected speech.
3 Likes
this f word does too! 
1 Like
There is no ‘dehumanizing party’ so it’s not a political view, it’s a behavior.
I dunno, I kinda think it is a bit disingenuous to equate all three as the same thing.
I take it you have no cop friends or friends with cops in their family? While it has definitely grown in popularity over the last couple of years, the “thin blue line” motif was often sported in one form or another by people who had spouses, siblings, parents, relatives as cops.
Is totally unrelated to “Blue Lives Matter” which is a direct comment on Black Lives Matter and I think is rightly taken as “those cops were right to shoot those black guys.”
30 Likes
Excellent point; many nightclubs in my area don’t allow any athletic attire at all.
4 Likes
That’s a fine and functional definition. But consider another common use of the word - recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another such as right and wrong.
3 Likes
From a CNN article:
“What’s gotten lost in this story is that the guest wasn’t kicked out because he was wearing a Trump hat – he was asked to leave after being verbally abusive to our staff, which is something we don’t tolerate regardless of who you are,” Niedich said.
As someone who lives, works, and plays in NYC, the above is MUCH more believable. We have plenty of MAGA loving adults in the city, and no one is throwing them out for it. This is a publicity maggot doing what publicity maggots do.
24 Likes
Well, that’s the thing with both things, there isn’t actually clear message. A flag with blue line and spelling out “blue lives matter” may be more about supporting cops, vs “those cops were right to shoot those black guys.”
Indeed I have seen cops call out bad shoots involving “black guys”, though they may also support the idea that “blue lives matter”.
See, this confusion highlights the point I didn’t explicitly make - symbols, hats, slogans - the meaning behind them, the purpose one wears or repeats them - they can vary greatly. And compound the fact that politics are messy, things that seem clear and simple at one point can get perverted, twisted, and used as fuel to attack others and further divide political lines to gain power. People can even express support for an IDEA, but be against an ORGANIZATION because they feel they are a tool of this or that.
I dunno. I mean, I guess I can see the point the ruling, but are we going to start splitting up social hangouts based on political spectrums now? That is just going to make this shit worse. ETA - NVM - it looks like he was kicked out due to behavior.
OH well, that is totally different. If ones behavior gets you removed, and you just so happened to be wearing a Nickleback shirt, you weren’t kicked out because you like Nickleback (though perhaps he should have been…)
4 Likes
Bartender! I’d like a “Moscow Mueller” and a “Dark & Stormy Daniels,” please.
14 Likes
A right-wing Christian would argue that being transgender is harmful to society thus they should be allowed to discriminate against them.
Your argument only works from your singular point of view. If someone with an opposite ideology posted what you just did you wouldn’t like it.
2 Likes
These are drinks I would buy
