Kid doesn't know he just gave that T-shirt company some really good free publicity. Many more people will buy shirts there now, while they might lose 2 Trump customers. I'm pretty sure they'll be OK.

I think they did him a solid, not only making what appears to be a well made shirt, but also subliminally including the underlying message that his logo carries, at no extra charge. He can turn his shirt inside out if people get insulted at his logo, what's on the inside is less provocative.

As much as I want to laugh as this idiot (you thought a store in Haight Ashbury was going to support Trump? BWHAAHHWHAHAHA), the store really is in the wrong here.

He paid for a service and didn't receive what he asked for.

If this was a christian shop that had printed "fags" on a gay pride shirt (for example), we would be (rightly) criticising them for it.

If they really objected to the message, then they should have refused service.

Also, the employee responsible was fired and the shop formally apologized to the kid.

Interestingly, this has become a microcosm of the election. Their reviews are currently sitting at 2.5 stars on yelp, meaning it's a dead split between Trump supporters/haters.
Google reviews, OTOH, are at 1 star.

I don't know, if it's good enough for JLaw...

Given how weird and neutral in tone his video is, I wouldn't be stunned if he knows exactly how much positive attention he gave them and if it was entirely planned.

Edit: Maybe not - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9DFautmO_k

Hilarious. Maybe they should have tried to not giggle like naughty teenagers making a prank call if they want to be taken seriously.
First, they did make the shirt he asked for, a quality one it seemed, just with a bonus secret message.
Second, Trump supporters are the same people who advocate the refusal of service for people who offend their religious (or political) sensibilities, so what's his problem? He was probably hoping they would refuse him service so he could use the video as proof that "liberals" are totally hypocritical and refuse service to those they dislike but vilify "conservatives" for the same thing, but got something unexpected instead.

It's now pretty clear that initially they did this looking for and expecting a negative reaction they could exploit somehow, then pressed the point when they got one, thinking they 'got them' and now he can be the conservative hero of the week.

To be fair though, what response does one expect when one goes into a business in a firmly red state like Alabama or Mississippi, and an even more firmly Republican city, and then go to a world famously Republican neighborhood in that city, enter a store with a Trump sign in the window and ask them to make you a HILLARY T-shirt? I would bet $10 it involves threats of violence if not actual violence and firearms, not a quality shirt with a 'secret' message inside.

I'd imagine this kid was looking for this type of reaction from the shop considering he probably knew the store would find it offensive. I mean he really went to a shop on Haight street which is probably across the street from some random anarchist book shop for this? Come on.

For me it's quite the contrary, I would prefer that a company where I order custom printed t-shirts does not decide to chime in with their own political commentary not matter if it says "Trump Lover" or "I hate trees".

It is none of their business to give their snide commentary in this manner, they can deny the order and that is fine, then I'll go somewhere else.

Inb4 someone thinks I'm a Trump or Hillary supporter - I can't even vote in your country so I don't really care about them.

In normal circumstances, I would agree. These were/are not normal circumstances.
He sought out a store that would be the most hostile to his request intentionally with the hope that they would do something like this, no question about that.
In a more perfect world, I would mostly agree (except it literally IS their business). This is far from a perfect world.

It's a trap, because most liberals are against allowing businesses to deny service to those they dislike for religious/political reasons, even though they would really like to mimic them. That means that denying him service plays into their hands even more than making a snide subliminal addition to the interior of the shirt. This is the catch 22 they have put themselves in, where there's no good option.
I think they should be allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason....but those they refuse are allowed to make a public stink about it and 'boycott' (like this guy would have had they refused to make a shirt).

That's a pretty big can of worms you're opening there newt.

Do you REALLY want to make it ok for people to legally discriminate for any reason?

You'd be comfortable with shops refusing services to gays or non-caucasians or atheists or insert-your-own-prejudice-here?

"Awww, but we could boycott them!"

So, a libertarian market solution then? Those don't work. Because as soon as you allow a business to be racist or homophobic or whatever, you will have racist, homophobic assholes queueing up to support them.

Sorry, but you don't get to impose your values on your customer (regardless of whether your values are good or evil). Unless what you're being asked to do is actually illegal (and that includes hate speech, so asking a baker to make a KKK cake would cover that), you suck it up and do your job.

If you want to make a political point in your business, there are other ways to do it. Source your materials through fair trade. Tell this moron Trump supporter that the profits from his t-shirt are going straight to Hillarys campaign fund.

In a perfect world, or if average people were reasonable, yes, I would make it OK to decide for themselves. Sadly they aren't, so we've legislated what's unacceptable to discriminate over.
I do support the legal protections based on race, sex, sexual orientation, and/or religion (or lack thereof)...but I don't think there's protection against refusal of service based on one's political affiliation (maybe I'm wrong). I think it's stupid to do that....it harms the business and is not conducive to civilized behavior, but yes, I think business owners that don't contract with the government in any way, never take public money, and pay all their taxes should be able to refuse service for legitimate personal reasons that don't violate those protections.
Yes, I understand there would be abuses. That's part of the price of living in a "free" society.

EDIT: The alternative is, when a NAMBLA member comes to the shop and orders 100 shirts advocating adults having sex with children, they would have to make them because ADVOCATING for child sex is not illegal, just incredibly distasteful, right?

The store was wrong.

And this is funny.

And the kid sounds gay.

Not that there is anything wrong with that. (Except it is always sad to me when gay people go all internalized homophobia.)