Guy in Trump shirt not welcome at Smoothie King

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
19,860
11,525
187

Some guy in Michigan was denied service at a Smoothie King because he was wearing a shirt that had Trump’s name on it. One of the employees said the shirt made her uncomfortable.

First, if just seeing his name on a shirt makes you uncomfortable I don’t know how you function in life. Second, if all he did was walk in and place an order, he didn’t do anything wrong. If he started yelling “Trump’s your daddy, libtards” that’s different.

Of course, I see the left saying that if it’s OK to not make a gay wedding cake, they don’t have to serve him a smoothie. But it doesn’t occur to them that if they support the Smoothie King employee, they also are saying the bakery had the right not to bake the gay wedding cake. (Liberal logic is just as stupid as MAGA logic). And they have no idea what the smoothie enthusiast’s views were on the wedding cake kerfuffle.
 

Some guy in Michigan was denied service at a Smoothie King because he was wearing a shirt that had Trump’s name on it. One of the employees said the shirt made her uncomfortable.

First, if just seeing his name on a shirt makes you uncomfortable I don’t know how you function in life. Second, if all he did was walk in and place an order, he didn’t do anything wrong. If he started yelling “Trump’s your daddy, libtards” that’s different.

Of course, I see the left saying that if it’s OK to not make a gay wedding cake, they don’t have to serve him a smoothie. But it doesn’t occur to them that if they support the Smoothie King employee, they also are saying the bakery had the right not to bake the gay wedding cake. (Liberal logic is just as stupid as MAGA logic). And they have no idea what the smoothie enthusiast’s views were on the wedding cake kerfuffle.
The employees were fired. The franchise owner didn't make the decision nor believe that the customer shouldn't have been served. Justice was served. Some employees make an emotionally driven decision, then gets greeted with consequences.
 
OK so.....someone explain this to me like I'm five (from the article):

"A lot of people are surprised to find out that the constitutional freedom of speech does not apply to private businesses, which means private businesses can discriminate based on political viewpoint," he said. "You could refuse service to someone with a MAGA hat, or you could refuse service to someone with a Kamala Harris hat. It's just the law."

So can I now refuse service to a black person and hide behind the political excuse that "that person voted for the Democrat, and I don't like Democrats"? Or do they actually have to have the hat on or what? Or flip that around and say a person in military or police uniform and assume they're Republicans, can I also do it?

Do they actually HAVE TO HAVE the political apparel on them?

(Note: I'd deserve to be fired either way).
 
OK so.....someone explain this to me like I'm five (from the article):

"A lot of people are surprised to find out that the constitutional freedom of speech does not apply to private businesses, which means private businesses can discriminate based on political viewpoint," he said. "You could refuse service to someone with a MAGA hat, or you could refuse service to someone with a Kamala Harris hat. It's just the law."

So can I now refuse service to a black person and hide behind the political excuse that "that person voted for the Democrat, and I don't like Democrats"? Or do they actually have to have the hat on or what? Or flip that around and say a person in military or police uniform and assume they're Republicans, can I also do it?

Do they actually HAVE TO HAVE the political apparel on them?

(Note: I'd deserve to be fired either way).
I'm not a lawyer but I believe the issue here is that the federal discrimination laws only cover discrimination based on race, gender, and age. So, if you discriminate against someone for a political sign or stance then it's OK as long as they are not brown or female or old. The man in this story has no legal standing to sue. Fair or not that's the bottom line.
 
I'm not a lawyer but I believe the issue here is that the federal discrimination laws only cover discrimination based on race, gender, and age. So, if you discriminate against someone for a political sign or stance then it's OK as long as they are not brown or female or old. The man in this story has no legal standing to sue. Fair or not that's the bottom line.
It's broader than that. There are more protected categories, but political is not one. You could refuse to serve LEO, for example...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 92tide
Maybe it is just me, but if I owned a business I wouldn't care what their politics are. Their money is green too.

Same here. I understand it is legal to discriminate based on politics but it is still stupid. Especially if you’re a clerk in a store and not the owner.

Occasionally you read about someone at a fast food place that won’t serve a cop. They quickly lose their jobs. Classic case of fooling around and finding out.
 
Same here. I understand it is legal to discriminate based on politics but it is still stupid. Especially if you’re a clerk in a store and not the owner.

Occasionally you read about someone at a fast food place that won’t serve a cop. They quickly lose their jobs. Classic case of fooling around and finding out.
Regarding discrimination on the basis of politics, Ollie McClung says Hi. His case was about discrimination based on race, not political beliefs. But that's a close cousin.

I work 10 hours a week in a wine shop, mainly for the employee discount. Most of the staff is college kids, often just barely 21.

One of them about had an emotional come-apart when a customer came in wearing a MAGA cap or Trump shirt or something similar. She no longer works at the shop, even though the owner is what I would call a light-blue Democrat.
 
images


Total discrimination, y'all.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BamaHoHo
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads