Tommy Robinson asked to leave a restaurant because staff felt uncomfortable serving him…

[harriethoyle]

… AIBU to enjoy this?!

If you spout objectionable views, don’t be surprised if people object to you!

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tommy-robinson-kicked-out-hawksmoor-london-b1231594.html

Why was it illegal?

Discrimination laws.

Well, clarification rather than correction, I think we're basically in agreement!

I think you did imply you had thorough knowledge of the case I was asking about and you commented on the case in two separate posts. But that's fine, you don't know much after all.

Certain members of society (including many users of this forum) believe themselves to hold the only opinion of worth. They allow themselves to be bigoted, hateful, to censor and cancel, to dictate to others how to behave. They are openly offensive, racist and painfully self righteous. They will look down on you as they argue their point, belittling you with their superior knowledge and intellect. Even when you prove that you are indeed right, or express a lived experience, you are insulted, corrected, quoted at, mocked..
When you believe your opinion is the only correct one, you ironically become the arrogant, racist, bigoted fascist you so fervently believe everyone else to be.

What did they discriminate against?

Sorry, correction was an arrogant word to use.

Our staff can stop serving/looking after people whose views we don't agree with/ make us feel uncomfortable ? Excellent! My boss might not be happy as the business might close but hey ho! Luckily it's not a big business that would get media attention but if that's the case I'm all for it!

Umm…there’s a big gulf between having read all the documents (I haven’t) and not knowing much. I know what was reported. Are you contesting anything I’ve said about the cases?

How was he discriminated against?

You are wrong on the law.

Some philosophical beliefs are protected if they can meet a (high) threshold. Many of Robinson's publicly-stated beliefs will not reach that threshold (for example, that "Islam is a disease").

You are, obviously, completely wrong to say that you cannot discriminate against someone based on "odious, hurtful or offensive" beliefs. Otherwise the Equality Act would, contrary to its whole purpose, protect racism, ageism, homophobia and alike.

You should probably take a moment to understand the law yourself, before patronizing others.

Saying it out loud doesnt mean it’s not happening though. Apparently the only time we can justify racism is when it’s antisemitism.

So well said.

We cannot speak out against prejudice or discrimination while applauding it being done on somebody we may not agree with.

How was he discriminated against?

The concept of philosophical belief is irrelevant to this specific situation.

Section 29 of the equality act will explain it.

You're going around in circles. He was discriminated against because he was discriminated against.

Which protected characteristic was used against him?

Go read the act.

There's a lot of speculation as to why he was asked to leave. That is all it is. The law doesn't apply here, unless he kicked off in the steakhouse, which he didn't. Then I'm sure 10 coppers would have turned up to arrest him. I suspect some people are saying he's been discriminated against as he's served his time and was apparently just eating his meal. Protected characteristics are irrelevant in this particular situation.

I've read it. Try answering the question.

I disagree. Yes, the reason given was the staff's discomfort, and not specifically Robinson's beliefs, but you cannot hide behind "staff discomfort" if that discomfort arises from someone's protected characteristics.

Lots of posters, including the one I replied to, are saying that beliefs are protected characteristics and therefore Robinson was discriminated against. They are wrong. "Religion or belief" is a protected characteristic, but it only protects religious beliefs (or the lack thereof) and some philosophical beliefs.

Well read it properly then. :)

I take it you can't answer the question because he wasn't discrimated against.

But age sex, sexuality and race are not all 'protected' for everyone equally, are they?

Staff discomfort as a reason for ejecting somebody can, prima facie, be seen as discrimination. At best, it's poor judgement on the part of the restaurant, who will face backlash because of Robinson's high profile. Of course, there will also be praise. The legal aspects/protected characteristics don't even come into play here. Philosophical beliefs are protected in unfair dismissal claims. If you are a lawyer, you will know that.