"Thanks fuck you, see you tomorrow. Can't wait for you to have to explain what about my attire isn't straight so you're not running up against false advertising claims by not giving us a free beer everyday."

Also this really seems like about the easiest slam dunk ever for discrimination against a protected class but I assume lgbtq people aren't a protected class in whatever windswept sithole this is in.

[–] piccolo@hexbear.net 9 points 5 months ago

I think federally at least sexuality is a protected characteristic, but I don't think the courts in Idaho would respect that so you'd need to have the funds to appeal it up a few levels

Btw the ruling to make sexuality a protected characteristic was an incredibly rare Gorsuch W where he ruled that discriminating based off of sexual orientation was discriminating based off of sex (i.e. if you refuse service to Jim because Jim dates Bob, but you wouldn't refuse service to Jane because Jane dates Bob, then that's implicitly discrimination based off of sex)