Woman denied haircut goes to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

[Bar Sinister]

Why would you want to force someone to touch you, who doesn't want to? Let them do a reduced business, that's their problem.

It may not be quite that simple. What if your religion or other deeply held beliefs also prevents paramedics from touching a woman; or a doctor for that matter? Or what if your religious beliefs extend to excude blacks or orther minorities? The fact is someone engaed in a business that serves the public must make his business open to all who wants to use it or we end up with what American Blacks faced during the segregation era.

You are right about bigots probably cutting off their noses to spite their faces, but that does not mean that they should be allowed to do so.

 

[gerryh]

It may not be quite that simple. What if your religion or other deeply held beliefs also prevents paramedics from touching a woman; or a doctor for that matter? Or what if your religious beliefs extend to excude blacks or orther minorities? The fact is someone engaed in a business that serves the public must make his business open to all who wants to use it or we end up with what American Blacks faced during the segregation era.

You are right about bigots probably cutting off their noses to spite their faces, but that does not mean that they should be allowed to do so.

Ya, they opened a mens Barber. They serve the "public" by offering hair cuts to men. Period.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Taxslave already answered, but I will reiterate. The people that you are talking about were/are public employees and therefore should NOT be discriminating against anyone. They can always get a different job. Their wages are paid by EVERY taxpayer. Homosexual and otherwise.

No what Goob, if I walk into a house with a broken furnace and I smell pot, or there is a mess around the furnace, I can walk right back out of that house and refuse them service. It is MY right. They can always call another heating company.

OH....I am sooo choked. "The People" above you refer to is actually "a person." I had a
well thought out response that I'd spend considerable time composing, explaining that
he is NOT a public employee, but that he had a license that he had to purchase to renew
annually from the Gov't.

Anyway, I'm choked 'cuz near the end of this thourow explanation, my computer hiccuped,
and it was just gone. Ugh!!!

:roll:

It was a mens Barber shop. Owned by and operated by Muslim men. I smell a set up.

Yeah, exactly like the example above of the "The People" who is actually just a "person."

 

[Praxius]

It may not be quite that simple. What if your religion or other deeply held beliefs also prevents paramedics from touching a woman; or a doctor for that matter?

Bad example, as Doctors and Paramedics are a Public Service, not a Private Business.

Anybody seeking those jobs holding the above religious beliefs would be idiots to think they wouldn't have to touch someone of the opposite sex eventually and would have washed out long ago during their education / training.

Or what if your religious beliefs extend to excude blacks or orther minorities?

Indeed.... "WHAT IF"

What If??

Like what religious beliefs? What real world examples in Western Society do you have to make this "What If" worth responding to?

The fact is someone engaed in a business that serves the public must make his business open to all who wants to use it or we end up with what American Blacks faced during the segregation era.

Hardly, and if that is truly the case.... again, stop ignoring my example of Curves and address that, because they're a worldwide, multi-million dollar business that gets away with doing the exact same thing every single day.

They meet your criteria of a business that serves the public, but continually allowed the green light to discriminate against men without a bat of an eye from most.

Is it discrimination for Big and Tall stores only supply clothing for Big & Tall people?

Is it discrimination for ******* to only employ female waitresses and no male waitresses? (Seriously?? Who'Ters is censored??)

Is it discrimination for Chippendales to only hire men??

Is it discrimination for Victoria Secret to focus so much on women's underwear and not men as well??

How far down the rabbit hole do you wish to go here?

 

[captain morgan]

According to Laws in Canada yes you can.

Human Rights Tribunals aren't the Law

 

[Serryah]

If they were the only place in town, she might have a case but this is just... beyond stupid.

If she was offered a chance to have someone else cut her hair at the same place, and refused it, IMO it's no longer about the gender, it's about this person throwing a tizzy fit over not getting her hair cut by guys who say it's against their religion to do so. If the business is willing to compensate somehow, but she refuses, all credibility she might have had for this is gone.

Sorry, no pity, no sympathy, no empathy, just a woman who needs to get over herself.

 

[JamesBondo]

A request for a lunch-hour haircut has turned into a battle over human rights, pitting freedom of religion against a woman’s right not to be denied service based on her gender.

Faith McGregor walked into the Terminal Barber Shop on Bay St. in June to get a haircut — the “businessman,” short on the sides, tapered, trim the top. The shop, like many barbers in Toronto, doesn’t do women’s haircuts. But McGregor, 35, said she wanted a men’s cut.

Shop co-owner Omar Mahrouk told her his Muslim faith prohibits him from touching a woman who is not a member of his family. All the other barbers said the same thing.

“For me it was just a haircut and started out about me being a woman. Now we’re talking about religion versus gender versus human rights and businesses in Ontario,” said McGregor.

She filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario almost immediately, saying she felt like a “second-class citizen.”


more about this whining


Woman denied haircut goes to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario - thestar.com

She called this business discrimination based on gender, but what if we look at this from a different angle? What if we call this gender discrimination based on religion?

 

[Goober]

Stopps v. Just Ladies Fitness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bar Sinister]

Bad example, as Doctors and Paramedics are a Public Service, not a Private Business.

Anybody seeking those jobs holding the above religious beliefs would be idiots to think they wouldn't have to touch someone of the opposite sex eventually and would have washed out long ago during their education / training.



Indeed.... "WHAT IF"

What If??

Like what religious beliefs? What real world examples in Western Society do you have to make this "What If" worth responding to?



Hardly, and if that is truly the case.... again, stop ignoring my example of Curves and address that, because they're a worldwide, multi-million dollar business that gets away with doing the exact same thing every single day.

They meet your criteria of a business that serves the public, but continually allowed the green light to discriminate against men without a bat of an eye from most.

Is it discrimination for Big and Tall stores only supply clothing for Big & Tall people?

Is it discrimination for ******* to only employ female waitresses and no male waitresses? (Seriously?? Who'Ters is censored??)

Is it discrimination for Chippendales to only hire men??

Is it discrimination for Victoria Secret to focus so much on women's underwear and not men as well??

How far down the rabbit hole do you wish to go here?

My example is perfect. Most doctors in Canada are private, not public services. And are you trying to tell me that there are no Muslim paramedics in Canada? I suspect there are probably many Muslim paramedics in Canada who have decided that helping women is just part of their job.

Relgion has long be used to justify acts of discrimination. In the US various racists used Christianity as jjustification for discrimination against Blacks, referring to them as the "Sons of Ham." The fact that the Sons of Ham probably never existed was beside the point; their religion said such discrimination was justified and therefore it was. To go farther have you noticed the many violations of human rights practiced by many Muslims? Try throwing acid in the face of your daughter for a start. What we have here is an immigrant to Canada who wants to introduce his religious practices into the Canadian marketplace.

As for your examples of Chippendale's and Victoria's Secret you are defelcting the discussion with a red herring. This is about a person who wanted a business that was supposedly open to the public to give her the service it advertised. She wanted a haircut; not to become a barber, she wanted the Muslim barber to cut her hair; not hire her.

We have almost a million people of Muslim descent in Canada now. Are we to except all of these people from the standards we expect of all other businesses? If so the Supreme Court of Canada is going to have to rule differently than it has in the past. I expect this appeal to the Human Rights Commission to be upheld. But we will just have to wait and see on that.

 

[petros]

Why didn't she just take it down to the wood with clippers like a real man?

 

[Ron in Regina]

Human Rights Tribunals aren't the Law

Yeah, but their draconian decisions and fines, aren't optional if levied upon you.
If they aren't the law, then what are they?

 

[SLM]

Yeah, but their draconian decisions and fines, aren't optional if levied upon you.
If they aren't the law, then what are they?

Redundant. We have a court system. We have a Charter of Rights. Put those two together, we have what we need to ensure justice and/or compensatory measures for actual rights violations.

 

[petros]

Yeah, but their draconian decisions and fines, aren't optional if levied upon you.
If they aren't the law, then what are they?

I believe HRC now goes through or shortly will be through Queens Bench in SK

 

[taxslave]

Yeah, but their draconian decisions and fines, aren't optional if levied upon you.
If they aren't the law, then what are they?

I believe that you can still appeal their decisions to a real court.
It would be interesting to know if the case Goober posted voted along gender lines.

 

[PoliticalNick]

The whole case is a farce. Nowhere in the Canadian Charter, the US Bill of Rights, of any other document including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does it say we have the right to a haircut and said haircut is to be by a barber of our choosing. It is like saying I have the right to get a T-bone steak at KFC.

 

[Liberalman]

Hoooters only employ women waitresses and Cockers only employ men waiters.

 

[taxslave]

Hoooters only employ women waitresses and Cockers only employ men waiters.

But both serve customers regardless of sex. besides while women might be able to wear the uniforms at cockers not may men will fill out a ******* uniform.

 

[SLM]

But both serve customers regardless of sex. besides while women might be able to wear the uniforms at cockers not may men will fill out a ******* uniform.

What's scary are the men that do though. 8O

 

[damngrumpy]

This goes much deeper than just a haircut or a marriage ceremony. In this country we have
set up exceptions to the rule that all are equal under the law.
For example some ministers don't want to perfor gay marriages that are equal under the law.
These same churches and minsters will take every tax exemption and be unencumbered by
taxes the church would pay if they were ordinary citizens. If those deduction were given to
the church the money comes from somewhere. You and I pay for their tax deduction.
Therefore if they are receiving special treatment they should have to treat everyone equally
and perform gay marriages. If they don't want to treat everyone equally then get rid of the
special treatment for them.
Now for the haircut. The person coming into the shop did not swear or they did not threaten
anyone or cause a disturbance. The customer was denied service because she was a woman
and he belongs to a religion that forbids him to touch a woman on of his family. That in my view
is not an excuse. In this country we treat people equally and with respect. Again religion is
allowed to skate because its a religion.
IN my view everyone in a democracy should be treated the same. Religion should not provide
special treatment or exemptions. If this person does not want to obey the law then they should
suffer the fate any other law breaker would be subjected to.
If someone comes to this country and they want to be exempted from the law they should be denied
entry, or leave. If someone is born here they should respect the laws of the country or be prosecuted.
Its time we quit making exemptions for religion or other reasons and just have citizens understand
the Law applies to all.
A thousand exemptions, and a handful of small variances allows for big problems down the road

 

[gerryh]

This goes much deeper than just a haircut or a marriage ceremony. In this country we have
set up exceptions to the rule that all are equal under the law.
For example some ministers don't want to perfor gay marriages that are equal under the law.
These same churches and minsters will take every tax exemption and be unencumbered by
taxes the church would pay if they were ordinary citizens. If those deduction were given to
the church the money comes from somewhere. You and I pay for their tax deduction.
Therefore if they are receiving special treatment they should have to treat everyone equally
and perform gay marriages. If they don't want to treat everyone equally then get rid of the
special treatment for them.
Now for the haircut. The person coming into the shop did not swear or they did not threaten
anyone or cause a disturbance. The customer was denied service because she was a woman
and he belongs to a religion that forbids him to touch a woman on of his family. That in my view
is not an excuse. In this country we treat people equally and with respect. Again religion is
allowed to skate because its a religion.
IN my view everyone in a democracy should be treated the same. Religion should not provide
special treatment or exemptions. If this person does not want to obey the law then they should
suffer the fate any other law breaker would be subjected to.
If someone comes to this country and they want to be exempted from the law they should be denied
entry, or leave. If someone is born here they should respect the laws of the country or be prosecuted.
Its time we quit making exemptions for religion or other reasons and just have citizens understand
the Law applies to all.
A thousand exemptions, and a handful of small variances allows for big problems down the road

Ignorant response. They set up a men's barber shop. Not a "hair salon". As an independant business person, they have the right to restrict their clientele to whomever they want.

She walked in knowing it was a barber shop and should not have been surprised when she was told they don't cut women's hair.