SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (76019)10/1/2003 5:21:57 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (2) of 82486
 
"Anyone who Mojo doesn't want to take on as a client can just go to another masseur with no real loss"

Well...if Auntie is kicked out of the wedding she cannot simply substitute one down the street! But Moho can always stop being prejudicial and maintain his license even if he is fined for an infraction. Moho could do any job he is qualified for. Society does not owe Moho a particular job in a particular way. A wedding guest cannot simply wander into another wedding with merit.

It may be argued that Government is sometimes too intrusive into the business of individuals. And sometimes they are. But the rationale for intrusiveness is to prevent the petty discrimination of those who would deny important services to people and who would inconvenience and insult them over their personal prejudice. Society normally will listen to reasonable claims for (in this case) exclusion. But capricious claims will generally be dismissed.

I have already said that I agree with a service provider refusing to see clients when he believes he is unqualified to reasonably guarantee that he will not breech client trust or engage in misconduct. So I support Moho. But I consider him mentally disturbed...and would never ever ever refer anyone to his "services".
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext