Subj : Re: to mask or not to mask, again
To   : Jeff
From : Paradigms Shifting
Date : Tue Apr 19 2022 12:06:16

On 06 Apr 2021 at 09:18a, Jeff pondered and said...
 
 Je> On 06 Apr 2021, Paradigms Shifting said the following...
 Je>  PS> So this is not as straight forward as "having no shoes and no shirt i
 Je>  PS> the store is bad hygiene". And if we're being honest, if the main str
 Je>  PS> media started telling everyone that shoes and shirts were dangerous,
 Je>  PS> they'd toss all common sense out the window, forget everything they e
 Je>  PS> actually knew about hygiene and just do as they are told.
 Je> 
 Je> This isn't a law; it's up to the various restaurants and other
 Je> establishments. A fine dining establishment can even require male
 Je> customers to wear a coat and tie to be served, while a becahfront
 Je> establishment might be just fine with shoeless, shirtless customers
 Je> sauntering up to the bar.
 Je> 
 Je> The question is not whether shoes and a shirt are the law; it's a
 Je> question of whether individual businesses can uphold certain clothing
 Je> standards for their on-site customers. Generally speaking, they can, and
 Je> it really has nothing to do with the media.
 Je> 

There have always been laws against medical discrimination. They're just not upheld anymore. But businesses used to have to abide by them, by law. Just as it is against the law to disallow someone into your business based on skin color, religion, sexuality, gender, etc. 

Laws only mean anything if they are upheld by law enforcement and the courts. If they are not upheld, then what laws are actually on the books doesn't actually matter.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.