Bountiful City's ban on visible tattoos

I think this is definitely a two sided issue and on each side there is a reasonable argument. I can see the point of view of the employee feeling discriminated against because of his or her physical appearance, specifically tattoos and piercings. Physical appearance and many other factors sometimes play an unfair role in the decision process of an employer selecting future employees. No one wants to have unfair or incorrect judgments or stereotypes placed on them that would label them as less qualified for a particular job.
In this argument it is also important to see the point of view of the employer. An employer wants his employees to reflect the place of business. Many of the things we do are done in following a trend of culture. Culture influences many of the things we do every day, is different everywhere you go, and can even change over time. In our culture visible tattoos and piercings tend to carry connotations contrary to a professional atmosphere however accurate or inaccurate they may be. Everyone has heard the common motto of many employers, “the customer is always right!” Many times an employer must do things for the sole purpose of pleasing his customers. Some customers will not buy a product from someone with tattoos and piercings. However wrong the customer’s judgments of the employee may be, the employer simply cannot afford to hire him. Although I believe judging someone based on physical appearance is wrong, I believe it is not always our employers, but in many cases our culture that makes these judgments.