Who Cares If You're Offended

Thinking in terms of sound business decisions, let's say I owned a men's upscale clothing store, and needed counter sales employees.  In my search I placed an ad, and interviewed several candidates who willingly came to me in response, seeking employment at my business. 

The first, a young black man, came into my office and wanted the job I was offering.  He had dreadlocks down to his mid back, a teardrop tattoo on his left upper cheek, spoke in the slang parlance of the street, and all his front teeth were solid gold.  I tell him I'd hire him if he cut his hair, dressed appropriately and spoke in proper English.   The tats and the grill I was willing to accept, yet he declines, as doing so would be a sellout for him.

The second candidate was a relatively attractive young woman, reasonably educated and well groomed.  She was a Muslim, and wore a headscarf.   I told her if she were to dress in a conventional manner to reflect the culture and expectations of my customer base, I'd hire her.  She refuses to remove the hajib, and declines.

Ah, Yes.  Our Dear Friends CAIR At It Again

As a business owner, taking the economic and market risks to provide a high demand service to the public at large, am I not the sole arbiter of whom I hire?  The answer is no. Abercrombie and Fitch faced this exact scenario some years ago, when they declined to hire a Muslim candidate for a modeling job who refused to remove her hajib.  Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of this woman who sued for discrimination after being denied a modelling job at age 17 at an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store in Oklahoma because she wore a head scarf.  She initially won a $20,000 judgment against Abercrombie in federal district court. On appeal, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver reversed, ruling in favor of Abercrombie.  Now SCOTUS reverses again in Monday's 8-1 decision, ruling in her favor after the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) took the case.  I disagree with that ruling.  A company has the right to set its own minimum standards for any given position.  The plaintiff in this case was not harmed, there was no dispute of facts, and she was certainly free to pursue other opportunities.  But when the oppressive EEOC (i. e. the US government) got involved, suddenly it became a religious issue, which it never was.

Terrorist Imam Suhaib Webb (left),

Why do we even care about this?  Because as evidenced by this case and thousands of others, the creeping governmental usurpation of individual liberties in favor of idiotic perceived individual "rights" continues unabated.  In EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, Plaintiff has no "right" to flaunt her cultism.   "Offended" isn't a valid cause of action.  Yet as to religious freedoms, this administration bends over backward to accommodate Muslims in any capacity.  But not Christians; they're pursued and harassed.  Another "offended" Muslim incident blown out of proportion, and culminating in yet another American company begging for forgiveness, is the infamous Muslim Coke can matter.  But wait.  This Muslim woman who claimed in a social media post that United Airlines discriminated against her because of her faith, has a history rife with deep connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Imams.  Ya think?   In Minnesota, already a Muslim nation, a majority of Muslims want sharia law to replace freedom of speech and other constitutional freedoms. There's an aggressive agenda here, folks, and woe be to those who won't recognize the enormity of  it.  But you won't find the Department of Justice or Homeland Security investigating these militant Muslim factions who are openly engaging in overt sedition.  Not one.  Anywhere.

What you will see is vigorous investigations of the conservative, Christian political right in this country.  What you will see is the DOJ investigating movie theaters for God only knows what.  Loretta Lynch can be counted on to do the Kenyan's bidding by appearing diligent, all the while making smoke screens as cover for this corrupt administration's Machiavellian machinations.  Case in point: you will find DOJ again illegally making law by circumventing congress and implementing a dozen or more new gun control regulations.

Molon Labe!

So while we have to contend with - make that defend against - covert Muslim sedition; a new crime wave and rioting by black thugs; illegal Hispanic and Asian gangs crossing the porous southern to rape and rob at will; ISIS declaring a terror war on us individually; and a heavy handed and oppressive government involved in micromanaging every aspect of our personal and business lives, we see DOJ intent on just one thing.

Disarming America.