Just Desserts (Just No Sammiches)

[Sheldon]

Nope. not at all.

Of course you are - you just said so. You’re saying that it is permissible to deny service based on something as silly as an offensive t-shirt.



Boru

Of course I am not, and of course I did not say so. Also I have not actually said the actions were not permissible, though a business in the UK may refuse service at their discretion, as long as it not done so illegally, for example violation of a dress code must be applied universally. 

Note this doesn't limit anyone's free speech, it only means there are consequences to how and when that free speech is indulged, as of course has always been the case, defamation laws for example, one is free to use one's freedom of speech to defame another, but not with impunity. Just as one is free to phone a fake bomb scare in, but will have to suffer the consequences. 

There is a difference between censoring someone's free speech, and censuring someone for how it is used.

Note again, they are free to wear the bigoted hate speech t shirts, they can also make the bigoted speech in public, but cannot then complain that others react to it.  

Remember the bakery that wouldn’t do a wedding cake for a gay couple? Same thing.

No, that was very different, they had no legal right to refuse to serve someone based on their sexual orientation, being gay is not a choice anymore than being black is, thus the law does not allow discrimination on that basis, rightly so in my opinion. However freedom of speech involves a choice, thus there can be consequences based on how and where it is exercised. Remember the Australian rugby union player Israel Falou? He made homophobic statements in public, as he is perfectly entitled to do, but he was in violation of his contract of employment in doing so, and after a first warning, that contract was terminated. No one however, stopped him exercising his free speech.

I never said anyone couldn't use hate speech, or wear t shirts expressing the same, though obviously I would rather they did not. I also did not make the laws that govern the possible consequences of how freedom of speech is used, so in no way have I attempted to "limit those freedoms" as you claimed. Though I may be guilty of indulging in a little schadenfreude, at them falsely trying to pretend they are being victimised for their beliefs, rather than for the choice they made about where to express them, as if they alone are allowed to express themselves with impunity.