As a related question, could a black person complain about a white supremacist who refused to sell him meth? Or is that under the “quitcher bitchin about extra crimes in your criminal sales” legal theory, whatever that’s called?
You actually think you’re helping eliminate discrimination by suggesting that a woman has no right to safe and comfortable working conditions if it offends some creeps concept of racial pride? If someone doesn’t want to work for you or with you, they have every right to say no.
No, that’s not even in the same county as what I think.
Actually, they don’t have every right to say no, if their reason is a racist reason like yours. One of the rights to say no they don’t have is the legal right to say no.
I think there’s a general principle that if a business chooses not to comply with a just law, that it must face the consequences of that choice, which may indeed be destruction.
Except in cases where there isn’t. I don’t agree anyway. Nobody should need to endure even reduced choice because of arbitrary prejudices against their group.
I had to look that up (I’m not American). Not relevant.
It’s very relevant when it comes to musicians and entertainers. Believe it or not, performances are hard work and the money is not the only motivation because there are easier ways to make it than playing parties. When entertainers at least, appreciate their audience, it’s work they love. When artists hate the audience, it’s a horrible experience. Forcing someone to work under those conditions with the threat of a lawsuit, is despicable. I would tell people, there’s always another vendor. You can find someone who doesn’t despite you because hiring someone that hates you is going to make everyone miserable.
So, I’m supposed to be against requiring these performers to perform because they hate black people and therefore being around black people gives them a sad?
Shockingly, this isn’t a very good way to gain my sympathy.
You mean, kind of like when you don’t like group of people and you work as cashier in a store and you have to ring up person day after day, hour after hour, day after day. How totally and completely oppressive to store cashiers!!!
I’m okay with obliging everyone in society not to use their business as a tool for discrimination. You call that “blackmail.” I call that “a gross misuse of the dictionary.”
I have a great idea for a gay wedding service. It will do cakes, catering, decorations, the whole shebang. And I’ll call it Adam and Steve’s. Who else is in?
Yeah, good luck with THAT.
Here’s hoping you also don’t act the same way in job as a librarian.
Of course I changed her examples inorder to make a better point.
I’m not surprised, however, of your own, very obvious, diminished capacity if you don’t get the difference between a taxi driver getting a rapist home and a taxi driver taking the rapist to rape someone.
It’s the same, without the quota. “Services are to be offered to everyone” is a legal consideration, not a moral one. People should follow the law or pay the consequences.
A won’t do business with B because A disapproves of B’s actions.
B won’t do business with A because B disapproves of A’s actions.
It’s perfectly correct for you to try to rally a campaign against Jakes’s bakery for whatever the hell freaking reasons you may wish.
A won’t do business with B because A disapproves of B’s actions.
B won’t do business with A because B disapproves of A’s actions.
I may think the disapproval is stupid, but largely support their right to do so.
Dude, not baking a cake is “ostracise” and makes "social outcasts?!
You could say that, by clearly being bigots they signal people not to buy there.
A won’t do business with B because A disapproves of B’s actions.
B won’t do business with A because B disapproves of A’s actions.
In the US buses are ususally a governement monopoly and discrimination was enforced by law. I reject that the governement make anyone discriminate.
