OK, how about if I don't serve blonde people? Certainly, one's haircolor can be changed if they want to eat in my restaurant...
Or let's say I don't serve lawyers. That is a required "quality"...
It is rather irrelevant to the question.
Is it wrong to deny OJ Simpson a service?
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
OK, how about if I don't serve blonde people? Certainly, one's haircolor can be changed if they want to eat in my restaurant...
Or let's say I don't serve lawyers. That is a required "quality"...
It is rather irrelevant to the question.
syz:
Aren't people asserting that O.J should be denied service because he is a murderer?
I'm just pointing out that he was never found guilty in a criminal court of law. In otherwords, he is innocent until proven guilty.
Aren't people asserting that O.J should be denied service because he is a murderer?
I'm just pointing out that he was never found guilty in a criminal court of law. In otherwords, he is innocent until proven guilty.
Stella Liebeck.
Spilled coffee in her lap while adding cream and sugar.
Suffered severe burns, requiring two years of treatment involving skin grafts and medical costs of $20,000.
McDonalds refused an offer to settle for the $20,000 medical costs.
The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 compensation, reduced to $160,000 because Liebeck was judged to be partly at fault.
They also awarded $2.7 million punitive damages, but the judge reduced that amount to $480,000.
Rather than go to appeal, McDonalds and Liebeck settled out of court for an unknown amount.
Source:
The TRUE Stella Awards, by Randy Cassingham.
Well, I guess the original question can be 2 layered:
1. Can someone deny a service based on something he doesn't like.
2. In particular how does it apply to OJ?
My answer would be that as long as it is a private enterprise, they can make their own rules. In OJ's case, he was found liable not to mention most people believes that the criminal case was a travesty and 3rd, the owner was upset about the bookdeal, so your point was irrelevant to the topic...
1. Can someone deny a service based on something he doesn't like.
2. In particular how does it apply to OJ?
My answer would be that as long as it is a private enterprise, they can make their own rules. In OJ's case, he was found liable not to mention most people believes that the criminal case was a travesty and 3rd, the owner was upset about the bookdeal, so your point was irrelevant to the topic...
L
laughing weasel
Guest
What about docters who refuse to operate or treat malpractice lawyers? Is that ethical? If it is nonemergency situation and they are able to go to another doctor. I am in favor of people being able to choose their customers as they see fit as long as they do not discriminate against race, religon, or creed.
there are other things going against oj besides being a murderer like thrying to profit of the deaths of those he murdered
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
OJ was found not guilty by the legal system. All that means is that the government must treat him as innocent. This does not apply to private citizens. Big difference!
Uh-oh. That could get the owner busted for slander! OJ is not a "murderer" because he was found not guilty by the government's own legal system, and the government gets to define who's a murderer and who isn't. If anyone calls OJ a murderer in print, it would be just like calling anyone else a murderer who isn't. It's slander and it's a crime.
Because the guy has no criminal history! He was found not guilty by a jury of his peers!
These "protected groups" are specifically defined in legislation. America has been wrestling with this for decades and we have reached a very uneasy compromise that we are not allowed to discriminate against people because of their ethnicity, religion, gender, and with more exceptions age, and with uneven enforcement sexual orientation. All other discrimination is more or less legal.
Not in terms of the law, but certainly a big corporation would be more vigorously prosecuted.
I see someone else clarified this later on, but to add more details:
- McDonalds knew that its coffee was a full twenty degrees hotter (11C) than anyone else's. That is some really damn hot liquid to hand somebody without a warning, especially knowing that people commonly set it in their laps and go bouncing off down the road in their cars.
- They had already settled seven hundred cases of similar injury.
- They never consulted with a burn specialist.
- Stella was 78 years old and had never sued anyone in her life.
- All she asked for was straight reimbursement for her medical expenses.
- She only added punitive damages because McDonald's stonewalled this rather reasonable request.
Easy. All you have to do is look at the Supreme Court decisions for the past 75 years. The Constitution means nothing any more. The government can do whatever the hell it wants, so private citizens figure maybe they can get away with it too.
More clearly, civil courts render civil judgments. By definition they do not render criminal judgments. A person who loses a civil lawsuit is not a criminal by definition, and therefore has no criminal record.
That is probably okay. Blonde people are not protected against discrimination by law. If you discriminate against them because they are of Nordic ethnicity, then you're crossing the line. You'd better also discriminate against black, Latino, and Asian people whose hair is blonde from dyeing or an accident of ancestry.
I would say that must be legal. On the other hand, as a practical matter you're going up against the legal profession itself. It just doesn't sound like a sensible idea to me.
We've recently had to start sorting out the conflict of people who refuse to perform their job duties because of what they claim are the mandates of their religion. Since the miscreants are have always been Christians and America refuses to rein in Christianity's abuses, naturally they usually get away with it. Now that Muslims are trying it, it will be interesting to see if we are as kind to them. In Minneapolis, Somali taxi drivers have refused to pick up airport passengers with liquor in their luggage. In NYC, some Muslim taxi driver refused to pick up a blind lady because she had a guide dog and he thinks dogs, who have been our beloved companions for 15,000 years, are too dirty to live among us.
Let's see. Maybe I'm a Rastafarian and my religion requires me to smoke dope every night. My boss requires me to take random piss tests and he fires me because I turn up positive. Will the law be as kind to me as it was to the Christian pharmacist who refused to stock the "morning-after" pill, resulting in a woman becoming pregnant because it was Friday night in a small town and every other pharmacy was closed until Monday morning?
In 1989, Simpson was convicted of spousal abuse for beating her. He got probation, community service, and fines totaling less than $1,000.
Yep, and he was also convicted of wrongful death in the death of his wife.
Fraggle sometimes types faster and more than his brain can handle! And he sure can type a lot of words!!! He and Tiassa were having a contest on number of non-sensical words they could type .....Fraggle is winning hands down!
Baron Max
