Gay hair stylist refuses to serve governor

DigitalDrifter

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2013
48,784
27,386
2,605
Oregon
The governor should file a lawsuit against the little whiny bigot for refusing to cut her hair.

Of course she won't, she has too much class (unlike the other side) and will simply go elsewhere.

Stylist Won't Cut Governor's Hair Over Gay Marriage Stance


New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) "has lost a hair stylist thanks to her position against gay marriage,"*KOB TV*reports."Antonio Darden, a popular stylist who runs Antonio's Hair Studio in Santa Fe, said he cut Martinez' hair three times, but that's it -- unless she changes her mind about gay marriage."Said Darden: "The governor's aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in. Because of her stances and her views on this I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I'd changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no again."

Stylist Won't Cut Governor's Hair Over Gay Marriage Stance
 
Will New Mexico's EEOC or whatever they call it file suit against him for discrimination?

She shouldn't have to file charges...
 
How is this any different than the whole gay wedding cake bakers thing?

It isn't. If those who believe the bakers must bake a cake for a gay wedding they must also believe that this hairstylist must cut the gov's hair, regardless of the gov's stance on ssm.
 
The governor should file a lawsuit against the little whiny bigot for refusing to cut her hair.

Of course she won't, she has too much class (unlike the other side) and will simply go elsewhere.

This culture war is out of control. What will be next? Conservative pharmacuetical companies slipping placebos into the bottles of AZT heading out to treat HIV patients? I mean come on! It's OK to deny service to the governor's hair just after she vetoed the Bill that was an act and gesture to gays?

Wow, this cult is really getting out of control and this is pushing things to a civil unrest and desperation. The US Supreme Court should've come out and clearly defined what they decided last Summer in Windsor. None of this stuff would be happening now. All people will understand what they're going to anyway once the SCOTUS hears the cult of LGBT vs Utah this year: That state's have the "unquestioned authority" to say yes or no to gay marriage and that once that's done, the matter of who does or doesn't bake a cake or cut hair will be laid to rest.

Shame on the Supreme Court for portraying ambiguity on the Windsor decision! The court of public sentiment is no place to try this case. Doing so is causing real problems and escalating anger and outrage. Great cocktail to put out there while the nation swoons from debt, terrorism and economic collapse. What the hell are we paying the 9 Justices to do? Pass on their jobs and hand it off to the people to duke it out in the streets to resolve?
 
Last edited:
This is not a denial to a whole group, it is a denial to ONE person the hairdresser deems to be a blithering idiot.

Even a blithering idiot knows not to let a hostile near her hair.
 
This is not a denial to a whole group, it is a denial to ONE person the hairdresser deems to be a blithering idiot.

Even a blithering idiot knows not to let a hostile near her hair.

Sure, uh-huh.

You wear your double standard like a pro.
 
2 liberals on this thread have said the barber has no right to deny the governor service. Yet the circle jerk continues :dunno:

If you are counting me, you'd better recheck my post. I said that IF the barber's refusal is against the state's equal access laws........IF.

I can't see how that could be. Just like with the cake it's not a free speech issue because there is no speech involved in the product :dunno:
 
This is not a denial to a whole group, it is a denial to ONE person the hairdresser deems to be a blithering idiot.

Even a blithering idiot knows not to let a hostile near her hair.

And a baker refused to bake a cake for one couple. And she was put out of business for refusing to do so.
 
This is not a denial to a whole group, it is a denial to ONE person the hairdresser deems to be a blithering idiot.

Even a blithering idiot knows not to let a hostile near her hair.

And a baker refused to bake a cake for one couple. And she was put out of business for refusing to do so.

That was actually her choice to change the way her business operated after the ruling. And again, if it happened to go to court, the barber would lose this case.
 
The governor should file a lawsuit against the little whiny bigot for refusing to cut her hair.

Of course she won't, she has too much class (unlike the other side) and will simply go elsewhere.

Stylist Won't Cut Governor's Hair Over Gay Marriage Stance


New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) "has lost a hair stylist thanks to her position against gay marriage,"*KOB TV*reports."Antonio Darden, a popular stylist who runs Antonio's Hair Studio in Santa Fe, said he cut Martinez' hair three times, but that's it -- unless she changes her mind about gay marriage."Said Darden: "The governor's aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in. Because of her stances and her views on this I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I'd changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no again."

see, iffen she was smart...she woulda cut it and fucked it all up. LOL.
 
Gay barber violated equal access laws.

Gov can sue and win.

She won't lower herself to do that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top