People claim (purple) Ohio is getting more blue, perhaps they’re correct.
March 2005: Yonkers, NY - Ecuadorean Dunkin’ Donuts manager removes sign inviting customers to complain if they hear a foreign language spoken by the employees.
I don’t care if you think Tom Ullum is insensitive. You can even call him a dick tumor if you so desire. But don’t try to convince yourself - or others - that stealing a man’s money and literally sending him off to a re-education gulag is a decision you’re comfortable with.
Well, I wouldn’t go that far. But I might ask you to post the thread title you had intended to post. If you do it in the next twenty minutes, I’ll even link it to the mods and ask them to fix it for real.
I would be perfectly comfortable with the ruling in certain circumstances. I don’t understand what the rant is about.
There are plenty of people in Ohio, who, upon seeing my skin color, would (and have) asked me if I speak English. And depending on the manner in which they asked, I respond with anything between “Yes, ma’am” and “What the fuck do you think, goddamned hick motherfucker?”
If I walked into a store and the owner said, either verbally or with a sign, “speak English or get out,” then I would speak some English and get out.
If I witnessed a patron attempting to communicate an order in a foreign language while the employee informed them that they only speak English, then I completely understand.
If someone doesn’t speak English, how are they going to read the “For Service Speak English” sign? It’s a dumb sign. “Ingles solamente, por favor” would be far more appropriate.
Its a private business. Afaiac he can put any dumb shit he wants up. If I’m offended I won’t patronize his establishment. If I saw that sign I’d probably walk in, call him a dumb fuck in spanish and then walk out, never to set foot in again.
ORDERING him to remove the sign is bad enough. That other shit is over the top.
It’s important to note that the sign doesn’t represent an actual rule. The sign is changed periodically, and its main purpose seems to be advertising that the place caters to reactionary pricks. (In context, it’s clear that it’s supposed to be read as a joke, however pitiful an example it might be.) Its current incarnation is just the most recent slogan.
I mean, there’s no suggestion that non-WASPs have ever been refused service. At the same time, it’s a big ugly sign that makes it pretty clear that white christian republicans are more welcome than recent immigrants. Not much different that a big banner that says “Up yours, spics!”
It’s one thing to cater to a certain demographic, and it’s another thing to advertise that anyone outside that demographic is unwelcome – especially if there are lots of people walking by the sign every day that are going to made to feel unwelcomed.
I don’t think diversity training is such a bad idea for the guy, if he doesn’t get that he’s creating ugliness in his community.
Personally, I’d rather just see him starve – but I’m sure that there are enough Archie Bunker types in the neighborhood who’ll continue to happily swill shitty beer there.
What? Because there is a regulation (law, whatever) that distinguishes between political speech and commercial speech that automatically makes it right? Interesting. To me it means a little bit of freedom died whenever they made this distinction (even if they made it originally)…the freedom for this asshole to BE an asshole in his own place of business. Those poor ‘mexicans’ don’t need protection…if they aren’t welcome in this fuck heads bar because they don’t speak english then they can take their money to someone more tolerants bar.
So I’m confused about commercial speech I guess. Is the problem that he had the sign out in public where everyone walking by can see? If he had it over his bar where only patrons could see would that be ok?
Is anything posted by a shop/restraunt/business qualify as “commercial speech” or is commercial speech just advertising text?
I’m not certain how the legal distinction is made or what exactly the caselaw on determining what is and isn’t commercial speech is, but I’m surprised so many people aren’t aware that commercial speech isn’t held as equally worthy of protection as any other speech (why should it be? We all know “free speech” isn’t an absolute. Speech intended to sell a product is not the same as other types of speech.)
Laws regulating commercial speech have a significantly lower standard of scrutiny than laws regulating other types of speech.
There have been no allegations of discrimination here, just a stupid sign. I have not seen any reports that this guy refused service to anyone. Where did you get discrimination from?
Maybe it’s just my pre-coffee state, but I didn’t think Yonkers, N.Y. was part of Ohio, at least not since the last period of continental drift.
Illiteracy is spreading - here’s the tail end of the latest Hurricane Wilma update from the National Hurricane Center: “THERE IS PRACTICALLY NO CHANGE FROM THE PREVIOUS ADVISORY WITH THE SHORT TERM FORECAST BE MORE UNCERTAIN THAN USUAL.” :dubious:
So if his sign had said “No Niggers” you’d think it ok until he actually refused to serve a black person? You don’t think such a sign might lead someone to think that the business had a policy of not serving them?
Did his sign say “no non-English speakers”? No, it did not. It said “For service speak English”. One could make the argument that he was simply letting patrons know that the bartender only spoke English, and ordering in Tibetan would be fruitless. That may not have been his intention, but equating the sign with one that said “no niggers” is a complete strawman.
A more analogous sign would be something like “Jive talk and rap not spoken here.” But I think that might prove unlawful racial discrimination, even if no Black person was actually refused service.
Let the redneck keep his sign, i say. Maybe he and his ilk will just keep inbreeding until there aren’t enough morons around any more to sustain his sort of attitude.
I think aamco’s observation is rather appropriate here: what the fuck is the point of a sign like this? Anyone who can read it is probably going to be speaking English anyway, and anyone who can’t speak English isn’t going to be able to read the sign. Given those likelihoods, it’s clear that he just has the sign there to appeal to dribbling idiots who patronize his establishment. I think that the sort of training they want him to undergo is pointless; some skulls are just too thick to be penetrated.
I work in an office whose function is to provide free services to poor people. Almost every day someone telephones us and asks “Someone there speaking Spanish?” in a fairly aggressive tone of voice. When we say no, no one does, most of the time the caller just hangs up. After a few years of this, I can certainly understand the feelings of the man with the sign. I am NOT A RACIST!!! I am tired of being told I am a racist for wanting people to communicate to me in English. When I travel to Mexico I do NOT expect the people there to speak to me in English. When I traveled to Italy a few years ago I took a pocket translator and tried very hard to communicate in Italian. I don’t pick on people with accents. I don’t pretend I can’t understand someone who has a thick accent or demand that their English be perfect. I just want them to try to speak the language spoken in the place they are visiting or living. Why is that so wrong?