DigitalDrifter
Diamond Member
And it allows others to make judgements about said people.Restaurant refuses service to man because of facial tattoos
Restaurant refuses service to man because of facial tattoos
I don't think it's appropriate to deny service to someone because of ink they may have on their body.
Should people be allowed to discriminate based on tattoos, piercings or other body art so if they do it as some sort of art statement? Such a new kind of discrimination
Or is it a consequence of that wave of morons from Mexico with face\neck tattoos as criminal sign? Probably yes.
The guy with the tats should just accept the fact that equal doesn't always mean equal.
It's clear-cut discrimination. Can no more exclude service to someone with facial tattoos than you could someone super obese, with some disfigurement, or other abnormal appearence. Guy should sue. And he'll very likely win. The officer should be sued as well since hs shoulda known better.
Bullshit. He wasn't born that way, he isn't physically handicapped, he chose to be stupid and tattoo his face. This is like choosing to put on bikini, and going into a high-end restaurant that has an attire policy.
The owner should be able to decide.
Now of course in America 2015 I wouldn't be the least surprised he would sue and win a lawsuit, but based purely on the law I can't see how the guy would have a leg to stand on. We already know he doesn't have brain to think with.
1st Amendment freedom of expression assures the right of people to be stupid and tattoo their faces.
Sure, to the point you're not allowed to discriminate based on those judgements.
How is it discrimination when it's over tattoo's ?