Uber driver "kicks lesbian couple out of car for kissing"

All of you making the argument that "it's his car" or "he's entitled to do it" are missing the point that by accepting the initial request on the Uber app, this driver formed a contract with the couple to provide them with a safe means of transportation to a specified destination. This contract, which is governed by the Uber Terms and Conditions, allows drivers to exclude passengers in emergency situations where their personal safety is at risk, but in the absence of any provision to the contrary, the driver cannot lawfully vitiate a binding contract (by refusing to transport the passengers to their destination) simply due to his personal feelings on homosexuality. Consequently, all of you making arguments about "discrimination" have also missed the point that there's a much easier and less controversial argument you can make in order to demonstrate that the driver acted unlawfully.

All of you making the argument that "it's his car" or "he's entitled to do it" are missing the point that by accepting the initial request on the Uber app, this driver formed a contract with the couple to provide them with a safe means of transportation to a specified destination. This contract, which is governed by the Uber Terms and Conditions, allows drivers to exclude passengers in emergency situations where their personal safety is at risk, but in the absence of any provision to the contrary, the driver cannot lawfully vitiate a binding contract (by refusing to transport the passengers to their destination) simply due to his personal feelings on homosexuality. Consequently, all of you making arguments about "discrimination" have also missed the point that there's a much easier and less controversial argument you can make in order to demonstrate that the driver acted unlawfully.

The lesbo couple deserved it. What they don't deserve however is rights.

I maintain that it was his right to kick them out

Uber fired him in their own self interest to preserve their reputation.

I already explained to you in the simplest possible terms why legally he does not have such a right. This is elementary contract law that has been applied by the courts in this country for over 800 years, and you cannot reject it.

I'm not going to argue with you tbh. Uber have taken the appropriate action, there is no issue here. My opinion remains unchanged and your way of going about trying to convince others that you are right is condescending and does not open opportunity for debate, which should be what you are aiming for. Presenting your argument with no room for debate, regardless of whether you are right or not, does not make me want to change my mind. Thanks for your comments

Please present an argument in support of your assertion. Otherwise, as Christopher Hitchens said, "that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence".



I already explained to you in the simplest possible terms why legally he does not have such a right. This is elementary contract law that has been applied by the courts in this country for over 800 years, and you cannot reject it.



No, they fired him because he breached a contract, the Uber Terms and Conditions.

Would you thus also say that there should be room for debate about facts like "the earth is round" or "2+2 = 4"? Elementary contract law falls in the same category, where it is sufficiently well-defined that there is no interpretation required - it's simply a matter of right or wrong. Not all opinions are equally valid and the language with which an argument is presented is irrelevant to the question of whether it is valid and sound, which is all that matters.

You are just another leftie who seeks to push LGBT rights and so on. Feeding into the blame culture and opposing all opinions against yours - just as I am doing now apparently. I feel as if you lefties seek to argue just for the sake of doing so - so argue this, if this was truly an equal situation why does he have to accept them in his car, with the same rights that let them into the car, he had the equal right to remove them from it - it was his vehicle after all and if he deemed their actions disrespectful or uncomfortable then why can he not remove them (from his own vehicle).
His termination was purely a cop-out on Uber's behalf.

Thanks again for your comments. My opinion remains unchanged and I take note of yours.

So you're one of those types. The next question is thus: do you care about whether or not your beliefs/opinions are true? If you do, then it's intellectually dishonest and troglodytic to acknowledge that they cannot logically be supported but yet to still accept the. If you don't, and that seems to be the case that you fall into, then there is no way you can have a rational conversation with anyone else in the world, so I wish you the best of luck inside your protective bubble.

Please present an argument in support of your assertion. Otherwise, as Christopher Hitchens said, "that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence".



I already explained to you in the simplest possible terms why legally he does not have such a right. This is elementary contract law that has been applied by the courts in this country for over 800 years, and you cannot reject it.



No, they fired him because he breached a contract, the Uber Terms and Conditions.

We're done here, thanks.

Thanks again for your comments. We're done here.

See, I can play this game too of copying and pasting the same thing over and over again like a nincompoop while failing to provide any argument whatsoever.

When you make a contract, you impliedly revoke any prior right that you might have had to remove people from your vehicle.

Consequently, all of you making arguments about "discrimination" have also missed the point that there's a much easier and less controversial argument you can make in order to demonstrate that the driver acted unlawfully.

This is elementary contract law that has been applied by the courts in this country for over 800 years

wow didn't realise how rude you lot are, it wouldn't be the same if it was a straight couple therefore it goes against Uber's policies of discrimination. Not hard.

Dude, I essentially agree with you anyway - chill out and stop being so defensive and needlessly argumentative - I do not want to continue this conversation with you, I have no interest in arguing with you. Thanks.

did you watch the video? the Uber driver told the lesbians what they did (the kiss) was illegal. lol smarts that one.