Suppose the law said companies were not allowed discriminate in their hiring or firing based on the prospective employee being in an interracial marriage. But then fires someone because, while on company business, gives their spouse of a different race a quick hug. The company claims they are not violating the law because the law doesn’t cover public displays of interracial affection while on company business. The public outcry would be, and justifiably so, huge.
There should be a similar public outcry in this case as well:
A metro Atlanta woman is asking a judge to strike down a Gwinnett County company’s gun policy.
Jamie Lunsford said the company violated her rights by firing her after they discovered she had a gun in her car while on business. Lunsford said the company violated her right to carry a permitted, concealed weapon in her car.
Her employer was a subsidiary of Iron Mountain, Inc. They are based in Boston Massachusetts. That might explain their anti-gun bigotry. Just as if the rules 70 years ago of a company based in Jackson Mississippi would reflect on their attitudes toward interracial marriage.
I understand the property rights argument and the right of the employer to set the terms of employment. You will notice I didn’t say the courts should force her former employer to rehire her. But I do think the public should let them know they don’t care for their bigotry and address this injustice via complaints and boycotts. Bigotry should not go unnoticed or tolerated even if it is, and should be, legal.