Should employers be able to discriminate against tattooed applicants?
>pic semi-related
>>78705202
It depends.
>>78705202
I'm a libertarian and absolutely.
>>78705202
Yes.
I'm not a libertarian but I don't see how a private agreement, like, employment, shouldn't hinge entirely on how the boss feels about your as a person. His will should be law, in the agreement.
>>78705202
Not just "able to" here but do so, always. Good luck selling papers on the street.
One or two tattoos are fine just as long as they aren't retarded.
For example, the tattoo could be for a dead relative or friend.
Entirely up to the business. Tattoos are not and never will be 'protected' under labor laws.
>>78705202
Yes.
>>78705202
if you're asking on an applications or in an interview if the dude has any tattoos and you deny him because of that (even though said tattoos are hidden and will never be seen during work time) then you're a total faggot. Otherwise, yes because you have to be a huge fucking mong or a career criminal to get a tattoo that you can't hide with normal clothing.
>>78705202
I am fucking sick of every American alive having fucking tattoos.
They looks like shit and they are trashy.
>>78705202
They should be able to stop whoever they want, for any reason.
>>78706465
>One or two tattoos are fine just as long as they aren't retarded.
They are ALWAYS fucking retarded. Tattoos are "significant" but only to the people who have them or "inside jokes" or "cool looking" or fucking images/logos that would be better on a cheap t-shirt.
>>78706465
>For example, the tattoo could be for a dead relative or friend.
That is nigger-tier trashy. Holy shit. What kind of walking human trash are you to get a "memorial tattoo"? That's not better. It's sub-human.
