Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
When rights collide

Posted by hamiltongardener CAN 6a (My Page) on
Fri, Nov 30, 12 at 21:13

An interesting article concerning circumstances when the rights of one person collide with the rights of others.

In this case, a Muslim barber refused to cut the hair of a woman because it was against his religion to touch a non-related woman. The woman filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal because she was refused service simply on the grounds of her gender. She felt she had the right to be treated the same as any man who walked into his shop.

While I can see both sides of this collision of rights and I sympathize... I had the thought that the woman could go to a different shop to have her hair cut. in fact, that was mentioned in the article. "It undermines the meaning of the word "right" because if they say this woman has the right to force the barber to cut her hair, essentially they're saying he doesn't have the right to practice his religion."

But then I thought, what if a teacher decides it's against his religion to allow female students to learn? Could a coffee shop owner refuse to serve female customers? How about if women are just refused any service unless it has to do with cooking or childcare? Or refuse to serve a woman without a male escort?

Women's rights
Religious rights
Property rights
Civil rights
Human rights

So what say you guys?

Here is a link that might be useful: Collision of rights


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: When rights collide

Interesting subject, HG.

I guess the Muslim barber knows how Catholic Institutions feel about being forced to provide the morning after pill.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Hasid's live a life apart for these reasons! Want to live in your own world with it's own rules then do so.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Just insert anyone into your paragraph:

Hamilton: "But then I thought, what if a teacher decides it's against his religion to allow female students to learn? Could a coffee shop owner refuse to serve female customers? How about if women are just refused any service unless it has to do with cooking or childcare? Or refuse to serve a woman without a male escort?"

What if a teacher decides it's against his religion to allow (insert black, hispanic, asian, handicapped, white, pregnant, Baptist, etc.) students to learn?


 o
RE: When rights collide

Disagree elvis. This is not a teacher paid with taxpayer dollars. This is the owner of a private business who is also deeply religious. Have you seen signs on grocery stores? No shirt, no shoes, no service? He is not making his decision just on the fact that she is a woman, but that she is a non related woman. He may cut the hair of all of his female relatives. I think the woman should have understood and gone on to a different barber. Looks to me like she is just spoiling for a fight. Again PC in overdrive.


 o
RE: When rights collide

What if a storeowner decided it was against his religion to serve (insert black, hispanic, asian, handicapped, white, pregnant, Baptist, etc.) customers?

There was a time in our history that this indeed happen, and it was allowed.

I think our laws (constitutional) trump other laws. Also, if I moved to the Middle East, I would expect to live by their rules, whether social or other.

In the American way, she should get her town to boycott the shop.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Demi, are we to take your answer as agreeing with the barber?

In this case I would have to say that the woman's right's should trump the Barber's.

I don't believe we can allow any business to decide who they will or will not serve based on colour, age, religion sex or sexual orientation. It is against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of this country.

If you cannot abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms then Canada is NOT the country for you. Either that or find work that allows you to honour your religious beliefs while not infringing on an others rights.


 o
RE: When rights collide

But does the woman have a "right" to a haircut from a particular barber operating a private business?

What if I visited a spa and wanted the tall, six foot Swede as a masseuse but he felt comfortable only massaging Swedish women?

Would I have the "right" to demand that he take me as a customer instead of using another masseuse or going to a different spa?

As I said, interesting questions, HG.

Chase, I do not necessarily agree with anyone in this case.

A. I couldn't care less about a woman's haircut and who does it.

B. I'm with mrskjun, this woman is looking for a fight.

C. I'm not surprised.
There are a lot of angry women who are looking for
fights, as I find out here most every day.

By the way, the woman, Faith McGregor, rejected an offer from the shop to find a barber to cut her hair.

I say she's looking for a fight.



 o
RE: When rights collide

I'm picky about my haircuts, so I can't imagine letting anyone near my hair with scissors that indicated he/she didn't want to cut my hair. For whatever reason.

So imagine my surprise when I find myself agreeing with both Mrsk and Demi. I also think this woman was looking for trouble.

~Ann


 o
RE: When rights collide

This story happened in Canada.

No business has the right to withhold services based on sex, age, colour, religion or sexual orientation.

Period full stop....


 o
RE: When rights collide

I'm not disagreeing with the law. I just wonder if this woman had an agenda.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Oh I am very sure she has an agenda.....but that is not the question at hand.

Our Charter is clear, can't do that don't open a business here...


 o
RE: When rights collide

Let me ask you this question, Chase:

If the barber had not given a reason that indicated he did not want to cut hair based on a person's sex, age, colour, religion or sexual orientation, could he have refused legally?


 o
RE: When rights collide

I believe so......

I respect his religious choices, I respect his telling the truth I really do. I also think the woman has and agenda BUT

Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms cannot be compromised if they are to be valued.

The Charter does not hold religious organizations to this standard but it does hold businesses to this standard.

I'll ask you this question...what if he refused to serve her simply because she was a woman? Does it really matter what the personal reason for doing so is?


 o
RE: When rights collide

I think it is a very, very slippery slope to assign why a person does something unless that person actually confirms a reason.

I see that every day on this forum and people can be wrong--arrogantly wrong in making assumptions about why people do or believe something. Some seem to only view the world from their point of view, and assign that same thought process to others--in other words, if I did such and such, it would be because of this reason or that, or because of prejudices about a person or expectations, or because of an agenda.

So, although I do not support not serving or discriminating against anyone because of something about them that is not a personal choice, it's a slippery slope.

If a business owner refuses service to someone that intimidates and offends and therefore runs off his other customer body, body piercings, suggestive clothing showing a great deal of cleavage and a skirt not quite covering her bottom, popping gum, and smelling like smoke or marijuana (I'm just making up everything I can think of, no particular person)
and wearing too much perfume--can he do that?

Did he refuse her service because she is a female?

Who decides why he refused her service?

Take away one of those elements--one of the unpleasant smells, the cleavage, the gum popping--and does it make a difference?

Slippery slopes.

I'm with Ann.
Luckily this isn't a problem in too many places anymore, but I wouldn't want anyone to cut my hair that did not want me as a customer, for any reason.

Also, I would understand and respect the man's religious beliefs, especially since another barber was made available to her to cut her hair.

The gallant and understanding and human thing to do would be for the woman not to put herself first, to get the chip off her shoulder, and honor the man's religious beliefs.

On the other hand--if every person that cut hair in Canada believed as he did--there would be a problem.

Good questions.
No pat answers.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I'm wondering if the reverse would be considered discriminatory.

If a shop refused to cut a man's hair because he was a Muslim, would that be worth complaining to the Human Rights Commission?


 o
RE: When rights collide

Absolutely! That is discrimination to provide services based on religion.

Demi ....the reasons you site are not discrimination based on the elements described in the Charter. The barber himself stated the reason.

I wonder what the response might be if someone in the States wanted to curtail someones first amendment rights based on a religious belief of theirs?


 o
RE: When rights collide

How did that situation of a few years ago shake out with the Muslim taxi drivers who refused to take passengers with booze?

Dropped off the outrage news cycle.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I keep hearing private business as if that meant of special license to discriminate. I'm a cardiologist for men only? If he has a license to be in business it contains no codicils that grant exclusivity by nature of the business.


 o
RE: When rights collide

These kinds of issues have always been a bit of a dilemma for me. As it appears to be for many of us.

On the one hand, the Libertarian in me wants to allow anyone to discriminate all they want. It's HIS business, after all.

Another part of me can't tolerate a world where people are discriminated against in ways that do harm to them.

It's all very tricky and I don't think there's a good answer.

Life is not simple. We're not going to wake up someday and find that we've finally arrived in Political and Social Heaven.

Hay


 o
RE: When rights collide

I live very close to Dearborn, MI, where we are cursed with a huge Muslim population. The other day I watched a Muslim man blow through a red light on a lightly trafficked road, directly in front of a school bus. At the local Costco, got to watch a Muslim man cut off an elderly American man, and he laughed & laughed at his fun. The old man was confused & almost hit him. I guess it's sport for them to be rude to us. They speak proudly about how respectful they are, folks, believe me, living among them, they are anything but respectful. Try getting served in a store in Dearborn, MI, as a female, I've had to wait while they serve the Muslim men, no matter that he came in 5 min after me, and shoved me out of his way. And these aren't Muslim-type stores, just the clientele is majority Muslim. These are events from the last month, I could go on all day if I went further back.

I pass by a beauty parlor daily on my way to work, they have a huge sign in the window, 'Women only'.

It grinds me to no end to see the way they disrespect our culture when they come to our country. They twist our laws to their convenience & cry foul at any perceived insult. I'm a fairly liberal person & believe in our great nation's freedom of religion, but they have confused religion & culture & want everything their way, Americans be damned. We must challenge them at every turn or they will take us over & one day we'll be asking ourselves how it happened.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Yes we will not all wake up dead and find we are in heaven and all for one and one for all society. Me against you, You against me because it is about me is human nature I guess.


 o
RE: When rights collide

For discrimination to be found it must be determined if the burden or denial of benefit harms an individual's human dignity (Law v. Canada). That is, the discrimination will marginalize, ignore, or devalue an individual's sense of self-respect and self-worth.

I find it hard to believe that any reasonable person would feel a loss of dignity or experience a loss of self worth by the barber's reason for denial of service.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I, on the other hand, think it couldn't be simpler. It's public vs. private... and public holds the law of nondiscrimination on its side.

As Joe said, "I keep hearing private business as if that meant of special license to discriminate. I'm a cardiologist for men only? If he has a license to be in business it contains no codicils that grant exclusivity by nature of the business."

If you have a private aversion to serving or servicing a specific segment of public clientele, do not go into said business. Simple.

The story, on the other hand, is obviously a woman trying to push the legal boundaries, and drops common courtesy in the process. She's looking for publicity.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Owners of private businesses are still subject to the law. The law in Canada states that you cannot deny service based on someone's gender.
Why is it that whenever the complainant is female, society questions those rights?
S


 o
RE: When rights collide

"The law in Canada states that you cannot deny service based on someone's gender."

I think if you read the many court decisions on discrimination in Canada you'll find it's not so cut and dry as you might imagine.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Leslie that is interesting information.

It would seem to me that this event, as described, would not meet that standard. However, I still feel strongly that the case should be adjudicated for no other reason that to reinforce or clarify the Charter.


 o
RE: When rights collide

So be ok with I cant serve you at this luncheon counter because you are the wrong color?
When you apply for a business license you sign on to the laws that that support that license. If you feel you cant support those laws then stay out of buiness. this is what I say to Pharmacists who wont give out the morning after pill and so forth-no one is forcing you to go into business which is public and not private.

I totally get this woman wanting to make a point that she ought to be able to walk into any business and get served-I applaud her determination to make this point because it is important-does it only matter when brown people cant be served? Why not more when it is than half the population?


 o
RE: When rights collide

There was once upon a time when a woman might walk into a barber shop
and be told by a Muslim man that he couldn't
cut her hair because his religion forbid him from
touching a woman not his relative.
She would have been told that another barber would be
more than glad to cut her hair.

She would have been respectful of his religion (since he wasn't wanting to be disrespectful to her)
and would have said, "I understand and yes, another barber will be fine".

Oh, wait , that is a fairy tale....nothing is that
simple and times are different.
It seems lots and lots of people don't even pretend to
use common sense or respect any more.

This case didn't even sound like a matter of a woman's
rights to me. I think she sure had an agenda and it
worked. She made the news.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Just a little off topic here, but on another forum, one poster has declared that a person does NOT have the right to commit suicide no matter what the reason.

Needless to say that no one that posts, agrees.

However, back to THIS post. This barber surely understood that when he choose his profession, that at some time, he would have to touch a non-related woman. Yet, since he choose to do this, it's his problem...I think it's as much his fault as it is the woman's. If he has the "right" to choose, then she has the "right" to complain.

Who gets to decide what is a "right"


 o
RE: When rights collide

This is not evenly remotely similar in nature to the civil rights struggle. Clearly we have as a society lost our abilities to extend any sense of understanding and consideration to others. Shameful.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Of course it is nothing like the civil rights struggle.

I find it odd that some Americans who would protect the 1st amendment and the Constitution no matter what....feel it is OK to contravene our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is every bit as important to Canadians as the Bill of rights and the Constitution are to Americans.

Is the woman being a jackass...probably...so are those idiots that protest at the funerals of fallen soldiers but would you take away their rights because they are idiots?

However, the fact remains that we have enshrined certain rights and those who wish to live in Canada, or the States, must abide by those rights.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I think if you read the many court decisions on discrimination in Canada you'll find it's not so cut and dry as you might imagine.

I would have to know a lot more about what Leslie mentions before I could comment on this case.

Sometimes this forum reminds me of the complaints lodged against talk radio; a fairly complex subject is reduced to simple opinions offered by many who are not fully informed - maybe not even somewhat informed - on a subject but are quick to join in for whatever partisan purposes (or ego-driven purposes).


 o
RE: When rights collide

"I totally get this woman wanting to make a point that she ought to be able to walk into any business and get served-"

I get that part. She has a right to get her hair cut at the business establishment of her choice.

But does she have a "right" to demand a Muslim or a Catholic or a Jew cut her hair? I don't think so.

As long as someone was available to cut her hair, she was not deprived of any "right" that I can see. I agree with everyone who says she's trying to get publicity and/or push an agenda. What a jerk.



 o
RE: When rights collide

"Sometimes this forum reminds me of the complaints lodged against talk radio; a fairly complex subject is reduced to simple opinions offered by many who are not fully informed - maybe not even somewhat informed - on a subject but are quick to join in for whatever partisan purposes (or ego-driven purposes)."

That's true. So it's nice when we can have a discussion without politics. There IS life beyond politics, pretty sure.


 o
RE: When rights collide

To not grasp that to be enabled to deny service because of your(take your pick) is to enable people who want to set their own rules is to be blind and oblivious. That leads to chaos-Chaos is bad in case you are History impaired. If you live in a country with the rule of law and wish to benefit from that nice safe environment then you MUST abide by the laws of that land. When you let some one off the hook because they are so very-nice- you weaken the laws that make everyone safe and Chaos is the inevitable result. Where do you draw the nice Line? That some of you dont see this as a civil liberty issue-well welcome to the 14 century- a very very bad time in the history of mankind. I can engender a religion that makes it absolutely necessary to my well being that I be allowed to sacrifice a white male Republican every thursday in front of the cash registers at Walmart-if you say that this man does not have to cut this woman's hair then who is to tell me no.
That is why we like to live in societies with rules.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Chase, it seemed to me that Patriciae was likening this incident to the civil rights struggle, but perhaps that's not the case.

Imo, the point of distinction here is that a protected group is not being denied based solely on their sex, color, etc, but because of ones' religious beliefs. The denial follows a primary and legitimate cause (although these beliefs themselves may be innately sexist or exclusionary, don't think we can or should go there).


 o
RE: When rights collide

hamiltongardener, there is a true story that brings this issue in some focus (for me anyway).
Long ago and far away there was this Harbour Master.
His last name was Knott.
He was a Seventh Day Adventist by Faith and therefore would not work on Saturdays.
He was required to do so by a leftist leaning Government.
Mr Knott offered to work on Sunday instead.
The leftist leaning Government refused to concede.
Mr. Knott thereupon resigned his Harbour Master's position.


 o
RE: When rights collide

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not exempt business from the discrimination clause based on the religious beliefs of the owner. What if Chick-fil-a refused to serve gays becasue of the +owners religious views on Homosexuality?

Religious institutions are held to a different standard and can discriminate based on their religious beliefs but not business.

I think the point being missed by some is that this is no a matter of opinion it's a matter of our Constitutional rights under the Charter.

It will be settled in the courts as it should be.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Interesting subject.

Out of respect for the barber's religion, if I needed my hair cut, I'd go some place else.

From the conversation here, I guess I violate someone's rights when I ask them to stop talking on their cell phone or texting while they are sitting at my desk. It is very frustrating to have to wait for them to stop talking about their date last night to ask a question.

I've also been known to ask clients to clean up their language or come back when they can refrain from calling their ex a *itch or dropping the F bomb every other word.

Just as others have said, the woman who demanded the hair cut is seeking her fifteen minutes of fame. I feel sorry for the barber who is going to be forced to choose between his livelihood and his religion. The woman has many other choices. She knew exactly what she was doing. She is just trying to disparage his religion.


 o
RE: When rights collide

  • Posted by batya Israel north 8-9-10 (My Page) on
    Sun, Dec 2, 12 at 10:47

Would it be legal or acceptable for the barber to put up a sign saying "Men Only"? Thereby making it clear that he will only cut men's hair, advertising the fact, and then informing women customers to please read the sign? You wouldn't be welcome bringing a ham sandwich into a Halal or kosher place of business, and the owner could conceivably throw you out/ask you to leave if you tried, couldn't he? Or would it be unbelievably rude, but legal?

ronalawn, I'm not really sure what your point is with all that bold type, but if I try to expand my understanding and to see your point, I would respectfully suggest that you are a tad off topic.


 o
RE: When rights collide

hamiltongardener, the point of my post is simply that if one's religious convictions are paramount, then one should seek service or employment elsewhere; if my Faith ordains that I should not harm another animal, then I should not apply for an exterminator position. If I am a total vegetarian, then I should not patronise a restaurant that uses animal fats to cook the callaloo stew. If I do not speak the Tamil Language, I would be better off emigrating to a country other than Singapore or Sri Lanka.
Mr. Knott won my admiration (youthful idealism all the way!) when he made his choice.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I agree ronalaw. Most people start a business because they feel they are capable to perform at a level to make a living.

Why choose a profession that you know out of the box is going to require you to do a job that is against your religion, want, wishes etc.? You have to know you are doomed day one. It is asking for trouble.


 o
RE: When rights collide

It is Civil rights because it is equality under the law-Canadian law in this case. Civil pertains to the rights and obligations of citizenship. This woman has the right as a Citizen of Canada to service from a business operating within the law. If the business chooses to not operate within the law they should lose their business license. It is that simple.
As I said before if you want to live under the rule of law then you must abide by the rules of the country where you live-those rules were made by the people for the people in Democratic countries-let this man change the law if he disagrees with it.

Another thing that strikes me is how so many of you seem more concerned by the supposed offensiveness of this out-of-her-place woman in expecting the law to be upheld-how about being her-deemed too disgusting to touch.


 o
RE: When rights collide

"...woman in expecting the law to be upheld-how about being her-deemed too disgusting to touch."

You're complaining about a religious requirement, which by the way, has nothing to do with the woman being "too disgusting to touch".


 o
RE: When rights collide

This man claims that his religion doesnt allow him to touch any woman not related to him-what is the basis of that claim-why is this woman untouchable? Why does he find her too objectionable to touch? Most people assume that it is because men are susceptible to slutty women( a woman who expects to be touched by someone not related to her) He finds her slutty(aka disgusting)? You calling this a complaint on my part belittles the offense to the woman. Why isnt he under scrutiny for explaing what are the reasons his religion finds touching a unrelated woman objectionable? No you want to make her-the victim- responsible for expecting the law of the land to be respected.


 o
"-why is this woman untouchable?"

I really do not know the real reason; and I have really tried hard to find out. Ever since 1964 when two male cousins got married (to two separate females, let me hasten to add).
I received a stern lecture from my aunt, the mother of the grooms) about the wife of the younger (than I) groom - never to be with her alone; not to touch her etc.
"What about the wife of the older (than I) groom?" I asked.
"She can tend to (deal capably with) you!" was her prompt retort.
Fast forward twenty years. The same two cousins, their wives, my wife and I and another aunt - all established residents in the USA - are at a family get together. There is much merriment and dancing (eastern and western). The younger sister-in-law complained that her ankle was sore. Eastern dancing makes you aware of tendons you never knew you had; and I was sitting on the floor almost at her feet.So I volunteered to give her ankle a massage. After a few minutes our aunt came out on the patio and without a word, slapped my hand away and brusquely returned to the kitchen.
You could have heard a pin drop!
No one said anything. There was no need. Some unwritten rule had been broken and I (at middle age) had received a stinging rebuke by my mother's sister - barely seven years my senior.


 o
RE: When rights collide

hamiltongardener, I feel that we can all find a path through this morass if we try to follow the basic precept,"So give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."(Matthew 22: 15-22)


 o
RE: When rights collide

Patricia: "Another thing that strikes me is how so many of you seem more concerned by the supposed offensiveness of this out-of-her-place woman in expecting the law to be upheld-how about being her-deemed too disgusting to touch."

I wonder why Patricia would say that. According to Al-Hishma (which deals with Modesty & Decency), Al-Qur'an: An-Noor (24:30-31) (summarized on Nikah.com):

"Islam also prohibits any man from being in complete privacy or touching a woman with whom he is not a Mahram.

A Mahram is a man that a woman can never marry, like a brother or a father. A brother-in-law is not considered a Mahram in Islam since he can marry her after the death or divorce of his wife (her sister)."

A strict custom, but surely not meant to say that the reason for no touching is because women are disgusting.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Patriciae, please accept my apologies, I didn't intend for my last comment to you to read as snarky as it did. Should I edit? ;)

I do think this will be a very difficult decision for the courts to make. As Chase has stated, society is unfairly served if we allow businesses to initiate broadbased policies that discriminate, whatever the reason. On the other hand, has society become so callous and self-concerned that we cannot respect another's religious requirements?

I do wonder if reasons or motives such as malice and oppression, or lack thereof, will be pertinent in cases such as this.


 o
RE: When rights collide

The law is the law, however... many times, common courtesy of religious belief does not enter into it.

Knowing there would be times when this may happen, why would one choose such a profession?

As an atheist, I think people too often bring private, personal religious beliefs into the public sector.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Religious observances should not trump the laws of the land. presumably the hairdresser was aware that he would be expected to cut womens hair , if he took the job.

What about the situation where Muslim taxi drivers refuse to allow a seeing eye dog to accompany its person into the taxi....does this mean that the blind person should just stay home?
If you cant dishcarge the duties of the job....why take it?


 o
RE: When rights collide

" I do wonder if reasons or motives such as malice and oppression, or lack thereof, will be pertinent in cases such as this."

Leslie made an important observation which it appears is based on some experience of hers/his.

"For discrimination to be found it must be determined if the burden or denial of benefit harms an individual's human dignity (Law v. Canada). That is, the discrimination will marginalize, ignore, or devalue an individual's sense of self-respect and self-worth. "

Using that as a standard I repeat what I said in response to her post.

I very much doubt that this case would rise to that standard. The courts will decide.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I think the court should look closely at the meaning of certain words:

I don't know of any woman in England likely to walk into a barber shop for service.

A barber (from the Latin barba, "beard") is a person whose occupation is mainly to cut, dress, groom, style and shave males' hair...

In modern times, the term "barber" is used both as a professional title and to refer to hairdressers who specialize in men's hair...

Did you know that in Maryland you may be registered as a 'barber' if you intend to serve males, or a 'cosmetologist' if you intend to serve females, but only 'barbers' are licensed to use straight razors . . . :)

How is the term "barber" commonly used in Toronto? How does the law view other 'single sex' establishments such as, for example, toilets?

Best wishes
Jon

Here is a link that might be useful: Obligatory wiki . . .


 o
RE: When rights collide

""""""What about the situation where Muslim taxi drivers refuse to allow a seeing eye dog to accompany its person into the taxi....does this mean that the blind person should just stay home?
If you cant dishcarge (sic) the duties of the job....why take it?"

Exactly. This could be compared to a Christian doctor who is against abortion going to work in a hospital/clinic that provided abortions knowing he/she could be called upon to perform same
. If your beliefs are at odds with the job requirements, why take the job to begin with. I do agree that this woman has an agenda...doesn't change the fact that the man is wrong.

One other question though........what about private clubs/organizations. Do you feel they have the right to pick and choose their clients/members. I personally feel that if a club/organization is supported solely by it's members it has a right to pick and choose.


 o
RE: When rights collide

I would feel marginalized. I would feel offended. I would want an explanation as to why I was untouchable. Religious freedom has its limits. Why would this man's beliefs trump mine-those being I have no problem with being touched during the hair cutting operation by this man. You can enable his religious extremism or not-where do you plan to draw the line? If muslim extremists require that women be covered in bags do we wear bags so as to not offend them-as a form of politeness? Fundamentalist Christians believe that men only should be in positions of authority-no women in management? We would not want to offend their tender sensibilities. You could work out some arcane system where the fundy guy on staff only gets his directions from a man-see where all this nonsense leads? This barber needs a new line of work when he cant cut hair for better than 50% of the population.


 o
RE: When rights collide

IMO This issue could be settled pretty easily up front by a good receptionist. When women walk in the door, make them an appt. with a hairdresser/barber who does women's hair.

I think it's fine if a barber only wants to cut African American hair, or specializes in fine blond hair or men or women or children. What's the problem? You don't go into a Jewish deli and ask for a pork sandwich. You should be able to say "Martin's barbering for men" and leave it at that.

Like kid dentists. They don't take adults. AGE DISCRIMINATION I WANT A HELICOPTER RIDE SEAT IN MY SIZE I DON'T CARE THAT I'M 300LBS AND 6'8" THEY SHOULD ACCOMMODATE ME!!!!


 o
RE: When rights collide

silversword, I agree and also had a good chuckle with a thought.
One wouldn't go to a Proctologist for heart surgery.

Most barber shops are men oriented and its usually first
come first serve but a receptionist will have to be on their hire list now
because I think there are some women
who will just go into that barbershop after this news
to "prove a point" and "make him" cut their hair or will sue.

This is what this screwed up world has come to.
This isn't even about "a right".
She was offered another barber.

Her right was taking another barber or hitting the door.
She was a jerk.

This is a rare case of a public work "rights".
I don't know that I have ever heard of a situation like
this before.


 o
RE: When rights collide

Can't the barber just wear gloves?

She is looking for a fight all right. Meanwhile, her hair will be getting long and scraggly.


 o
RE: When rights collide

october, she has a choice of other barbers in that shop
and many many barbers elsewhere.

If he was the ONLY barber within a certain radius then
this situation would be about "rights".

No reason for her hair to be long or scraggly.


 o
RE: When rights collide

TOPCUTS is just around the corner within 100 yards
of the barber shop.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here