It could be as simple as the customer not understanding how notarization works. Without knowing what the document was and what was being notarized, we can't tell. I suspect that's intentional.

Given the petition, it's almost certainly the case the the incident was staged with this outcome as their intent.

On edit - from their updated petition site

You're not notarizing the content or authenticity of the document, you're attesting to the fact you signed it with a certified third party witness.

I have authored plenty of forms of my own design and had them notarized. The process authenticates who I am, and attests that I am the person signing the document, and the date and time it is signed. That's all.

I'll ask him.

Edit: Here's their press kit for the protest.
http://unitedchurchofbacon.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Wells-Fargo-Protest-Media-Kit.pdf


Edit: Found more details, see post 7

Clearly if he were refused services because he is representing an atheist organization, that would be illegal.

Here is the statement from Wells Fargo:

The protest is to get Wells Fargo to provide non-discrimination training to its employees, and to apologize. So far WF corporate has stonewalled it.

The fact that a different branch was willing to notarize it tells me there was nothing wrong with the document/request, and instead, a problem with the notary refusing to do his or her job/affirmation as a Notary Public.

Last edited Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Here's what I would tell him. I don't work for WF, but I know lots of people who worked for a culturally moderate/conservative bank in the southeast that they acquired not so many years ago. There was a complete change to a far more progressive culture. They actively target minority groups for their customer base (running their wagon in gay pride parades, etc) and perform lots of anti-discrimination training for their employees. I could give lots of examples... but they all boil down to it not (IMO) being credible that the company overall has a problem in this area... particularly with him pumping this agressively when even the claimed harm was negligible - while he gives few relevant details.

Three things appear more likely to me:

1 - They have deep pockets (enough said)
2 - This provides lots of exposure for him and/or the church
3 - Most charitably for him... perhaps the notary mistakenly thought that it was a prank/joke

So deep pockets in this case, doesn't really hold water.
Exposure sure, but for a non-profit, meh as a conflict of interest.

New Atheism abounds with stunts and blather.

A series of stunts and a lot of blather.

It's just that the closer you are to the beginning of the religion the easier it is to see the stunts and blather for what they are.

You know that.

This is not the beginning of a religious movement. You also know that.

It is just another adolescent game. I bet you know that as well if you will admit it.

Is stunts and blather? Kind of a dickish thing to say. If they instead amassed garish amounts of wealth like the RCC, would you take them seriously and defend any bigotry out of their mouth? You're a piece of work.

This disingenous post is the real piece of work.

and it's people like you who cause these things to happen. If only people would accept that atheists are people and deserve the same rights, not a lesson.

People like me?

You mean an atheist?

What rights pray tell do atheists not have?

As I have been one my whole life, I am hard press to thing of any rights that I do not have that someone say who is religious does.

A sacred subject.

These attempts to deflect are hilarious. Baconistas.