Walgreens Clerk Cites "Religious Faith" In Refusing To See Condoms To Couple

That is a tough one because I do not live in your nation and can never pretend to be intimate with such laws.

I found this one resource … Can You Refuse Service to Nazis? - FindLaw

Businesses do not have to allow free speech, and are allowed to impose restrictions on customer speech and conduct so long as those restrictions do not directly target protected classes. An example we’ve all seen are the signs outside of businesses that read: “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service.” That sort of blanket refusal to serve is generally okay. It’s equally okay, generally, to have a “no offensive clothing” policy, which would prohibit customers from wearing swastikas or other clothing emblazoned with hate speech or obscenity.

I must caution you, I do not know, and my best advice would be to consult a lawyer.

1 Like

Yes, possibly. I am just posting the information I have seen. However, I think you may be guilty of a false equivalence. Unless you had a printing press which was specifically designed to print libelous material, then it is apples and oranges. No degree of libel will result in a classroom full of dead kids.
The potential for harm has to be a consideration as was demonstrated with the tobacco companies.
Right now the laws permit the manufacture and sale of assault rifles, so allowing lawsuits against them would be absurdly contradictory.

You’re right. Here’s a better one:

Suing an oil company when someone fills a two liter soda bottle with gasoline, stuffs a rag in the neck, lights it, and tosses it into a classroom full of kids.

You could argue that gasoline has a legitimate purpose and that guns have only one: to kill. But that’s not true either. Plenty of people use guns for various sports, even so-called assault rifles.

Yeah David when I was growing up in a town with many cafe’s and restaurants, I saw many signs in businesses stating “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”. While ostensibly claimed to maintain decorum and order, the result was, on occasion, used to exclude specific races of people. I was unaware of the extent of the racism around me as that was not an element of my home life whatsoever.

Most businesses will fire an employee for bringing such attention via media. Uncertain if this employee has been fired, which is probably why the chain is rightfully being boycotted. Not that I frequent drug stores regularly, but this seems to be another place that will not receive my future patronage.

1 Like

Nothing catches the attention of a business when you speak with your wallet. I have emailed certain businesses for various related issues, and informing them that they have lost my business and that I will buy from a competitor must tie their knickers in a knot.


Sure, and people sniff gasoline etc etc.
Assault rifles are named so for a reason.
My post of the proposed law in California was not to voice either support or opposition to it, but rather a response to @SatanicMechanic.
As someone who likely owns more weapons than most here, I deplore the fact that some of my fellow citizens cannot be trusted with the responsibility of gun ownership. The AR is a blast (literally) and the AK is a close second.
I think you are being disingenuous to argue alternative purposes for such weapons though, and the gasoline bit is just silly…

For sure. That is the one thing we have available to us to voice concerns.

How so? How many of these “assault weapons” have been sold in the U.S.? Millions? Tens of millions? How many of these have been used to kill someone? Hundreds? A few thousand?

If California wants to eliminate these weapons, they should do so via statute rather than some end-run like allowing people to sue the makers. After all, manufacturing and selling these items is legal under federal law.

I’m liberally anti-gun, but that’s as far as I’ll go with this line of thinking so as to not derail the original post.


Enough on guns, I’m sorry I brought it up.

So let me try more in the spirit of debate, say I’m a vegan and I work in a grocery store, should I be able to refuse to sell meat items because it’s my belief?

Agreed. That’s why I posted:

Notwithstanding your sophistry, I think we agree for the most part and I appreciate you voicing your opinion as that is part is the learning process for me.
I apologize for my role in derailing the topic @SatanicMechanic.

Well it seems that would be between you and your employer. Since meat eaters are not a protected group, you would probably be on safe ground as the proprietor. That said, the histrionics displayed by some religious zealots are what creates a problem. There is usually a civilized way of dealing with our differences. Given your example question, one would think it would be something already given consideration. If the grocery sold meat and you knew that when you took employment, then I think you should have foreseen this possibility and either resolved it with the owner or accepted the terms of your employment and sold me my ribeye.

Actually, it’s not. I’m just glad that people haven’t figured out they can do a lot more damage by chaining shut the exit doors of someplace like a school auditorium or a movie theater and tossing in a few Molotov cocktails than they could ever do with an assault rifle.

Oh me too. Being one who is concerned with self preservation, there are many more devastating methods readily available with less risk to the perpetrator.

Yes it is :stuck_out_tongue:

Sure, but what protection does that employee have from retaliation or harassment by that employer? Theists are granted too much latitude. An employer can make demands against your beliefs. If it’s your expectation to sell the sellable items. You are insubordinate, terminated. You are not protected from insubordination. Just no manager wants to be the center of a media firestorm, or they’re a bigot who believes that crap. His rights don’t override the consumers right to an unrestricted item. It’s just America is soft on religious infringement.

Yes it is the domination by the majority.
There are virtually no protections from the employer retaliation.This is the main reason I have been my own employer for much of my life. When I recognized the importance having more influence in the course of my life, I stopped putting up with that shit. Not everyone is positioned to make those choices and I greatly sympathize with people who cannot.
Rights are never granted voluntarily and since the almighty dollar trumps all, people are basically fucked unless they posses a skill or knowledge which grants them an exemption to the standard treatment.

Seriously, I argued against unsafe work place practices and got canned for “insubordination” working in the pharma chemical industry. It’s disturbing how workers are strong armed into doing unsafe things for a barely livable wage.

1 Like

I was just quoting the article. None of those are my words.

1 Like

I would be like look I need to buy condoms to mess around with hookers do you have any idea how many diseases those girls already have. I need my condoms sell me them clerk or I am talking to management.