Quote:I'll try and find the link latter but I was listening to the radio yesterday and heard a news blimp about a man who is sueing McDonald's for discrimination. This particular suit is by a blind man who is arguing that mcdonalds only having their drive thru open late is discriminating against blind people and other people who can't drive and have access to their drive thru during late hours. Now before we all ridicule the man he has a point, he is being denied access to a product based on his disability. Anyone that has any business experience understands why mcdonalds would limit access during later hours for safety and cost control but in doing so they are discriminating or excluding some people access.


I just thought this really illustrates the problem with discrimination laws, heres a company attempting to provide extended services but because they can't provide them to everyone they are technically commiting discrimination.


No it's not the same as the discrimination problems we had in the 60s but why is one form of discrimination legal or ok and another not? Is the minority being discriminated against so small that it should be ignored? Or should we accept that private business has the right to select who they will serve and when they will serve?


Ultimately the question is who controls how businesses is conducted the owners or the state?

You're really defending the lawsuit in this instance? McDonalds truly discriminating against him would be him going through the drive thru as a passenger and being denied service because he was blind.


If you're defending this man's lawsuit, why are you not at the same time railing against the government for not issuing him a driver's license?

---