Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

If he is not promoting Jews he can always come up with various excuses why. These people are very clever. It is much more practical for a business to say he's an admitted Nazi and Jews aren't being promoted, therefore he's the problem, rather than having to waste countless resources trying to prove what is in his mind at any particular moment and then hire lawyers to defend themselves when he sues for "discrimination against Nazi."

And yes, any term used in legal disputes is crucial if it is not specifically defined and if there is subjectivity. Subjectivity leads to litigation unless there is a specific person who is the ultimate decider. You are saying that a restaurant owner should not be the ultimate decider of whether Nazis gathering in his business is a disturbance. You want to give the Nazis the ability to contest that in court. That is a problem.

As for the last point, I just find it weird to see people ranting about how bigot's rights aren't protected enough when there are still many marginalized groups who are still suffering government sanctioned discrimination.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.