Since "Private companies arent the government" does that mean I can refuse service to anyone wearing Hijab?

I thought to myself today that when people claim they are "against discrimination" they are really only against selective forms of discrimination. I mean, look at that Wonder Woman movie screening that excluded men. That's a clear instance of discrimination but it doesn't seem like too many people care about that.

Even when Alex Jones got kicked off YouTube for his speech, there were many people claiming that "Private companies are not the government so his rights weren't in danger from the state."

To be consistent with that argument, if I would be owning a fitness gym, I wouldn't be obligated to throw everyone out of the pool for an hour just because some Muslim women are convinced their imaginary friend is going to strike them down just because they have the audacity to bathe with other men. And since I'm not the government, just a private business owner, I wouldn't be infringing on their rights in any way.

And once I thought about this, I recognized that I wouldn't even need to service them if they came to my gym wearing a Hijab. It's not a lot different from instituting a dress code that all customers are required to follow. And since Hijabs would break that dress code, there's no reason to cater to someone's personal religious beliefs. Its no different than kicking someone out for going shirtless in your establishment.

I really don't see how any of this makes me a bigot.

dreamsicle · 46-50, F

You’re talking about a few different things here. In your first example, about the showing of a movie for women only, that is sexist, full stop. If someone wanted to sue the company, maybe they could win or maybe someone could say, gender isn’t mentioned in the 1964 Civil Rights Act but sex is and then we would need to know if the business rejected males who identify as females. But you’re right people don’t care because it wasn’t the only pace showing the movie and they would be showing the movie on multiple occasions to mixed crowds so people may have been inconvenienced but not necessarily have their rights trampled on.
Alex Jones does have the right of free speech, even speech deemed by some as hate speech. He can’t go to jail for that. However businesses have the right to set policies a common example is if a business says you can’t sell in this domain or you will be removed. No jail time, that’s not discriminatory it’s just policy.
Which brings us to the dress code. So in a gym you’re not required to have special pool time for your female muslim customers if it would be too much of an inconvenience to do so. You would just be an accommodating, appreciative business owner. Like businesses that have special hours for the elderly or autistic. You can create a dress code but hijabs would be considered an exception based on religion. Same as a seeing eye dog in a restaurant for a person with a vision impairment. Exceptions are made.

Being prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group, like people who wear hijabs is what makes you seem like a bigot. Unless you would require all head coverings banned from your gym. Caps, scarfs etc.

MickRogers · 26-30, M

@dreamsicle "So in a gym, you're not required to have special pool time for your female Muslim customers if it would be too much of an inconvenience to do so."

I'm not required to.... at all actually. Even if the exception isn't there. I mean, if it's my gym, I don't have to kick anyone out of the pool for any reason.

If Muslim women are so convinced their imaginary friend will strike them down if they have the audacity to bathe with other men, then that's on them. Not my problem.

"You can create a dress code but Hijabs would be an exception based on religion."

Here's the thing, I disagree with you that religion should be a good justification to give certain customers special privileges over others. If a store, for example, tells its customers they can't wear face coverings, and are willing to throw someone out of their store for wearing a ski mask.... then i don't find wearing a Niqab or a Burka to be a good reason just because of religious belief. You would first have to provide a SUFFICIENT REASON as to WHY we should cater to religious face-coverings over any other face-coverings.

dreamsicle · 46-50, F

@MickRogers Oh sorry I confused you. I was speaking of religious accommodations, in a general sense. You are of course right, you don’t have to accommodate anyone m, at all. That’s why I mentioned it’s just being an accommodating business owner.
The second part of your response is because it’s the law. You can’t discriminate because of someone’s religious beliefs because the Civil Rights Act. I don’t actually have to provide a sufficient reason as to why we should, as you are calling it, cater to religious beliefs at all. You can’t discriminate against someone based on their religious beliefs.
A business owner also can’t refuse to serve me just because I’m wearing a cross around my neck. That would also be discrimination based on religion, it’s funny but that never seems to be the issue when people feel they’re being forced to cater to religious beliefs. Only those pesky hijabs and burkas.