[undone]

It is sad that it happened to a couple in love trying to plan a very happy very special day to be celebrated and of course think the shop owner should be ashamed of themselves. I also think that the couple in question ought to be relived that it came up in the beginning, for a few reasons first of course that it was not something found out at the time of service and then had an uncomfortable situation then and there, but also that they were not spending hard earned cash with some one with what I would consider to be a narrow mind, I would rather my money perhaps stay with some one more like minded to my self a business that did not have such "values" or judgments.

I have seen in the last 5 years similar incidents in the Seattle area, where a couple was forced to leave I believe a major football or baseball game, the reason was because they had shared a kiss I think it was just a short kiss if I remember correctly. There is a casino in the same area that was notorious for escorting same sex couples out of the establishment as well for no particular reason.

But similarly was it 5 years ago one of the two big names for the Philly steak and cheese sandwiches did refuse service to a customer because they would not order in English. Said he was not required to maintain staff that had spoke in various languages, he was proud to live and work in the US, this was in the city of Philadelphia.

Yes it is a sad thing to contemplate and why it should concern anyone else about the reasons or goings on of a privet event just that they were asked to help decorate something, however would we also say the same thing about those that control things such as air travel, boarder patrols banking, or other businesses that root out criminal activities.

I would not want to share my paycheck in paying for any service including the government that felt they were able to judge me and the people I share my life with. I originally thought yes of course a person should chose whom they provide a service to because everything business or not on some level is personal, but then I read atlasthome's post and it opened that dirty box that made me remember that it is not just about same sex relationships it about all the was we separate and label people white, black, brown, gay, femme, queer, bi, butch, tree hugger, liberal, conservative... It would have to encompass all of it. So I have been forced to reconsidered my original reaction and thoughts.

I have to say that no it is not okay, because we can not trust that some one would not extend it to mean they can say your shoes are offensive to me because they have sparkles on them or don’t have laces in them (yhep I mean this to be trivial) they would easily hide the personal reasoning's behind the legally allowed ones, switching one as an excuse for the other.

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

From a legal perspective- also depending on laws/regs within municipal/state/federal boundaries and jurisdictions, this could vary. In some instances, a business owner can refuse service legally.

But it sure can take on some personal issues- June's example states this.

There are "service refusal" laws for example, having to do with public health- like no service in restaurants without shoes and shirts. But, historically, racial segregation has played a role in in the US about this issue. I'd have to be stupid to think that some of those "service refusal" signs in businesses have been or are not directed at not serving POC.

I certainly still see "We refuse the right to refuse service to anyone" signs all over in businesses. Probably because of my age and being an activist during the late 60's and 70's, my response to these signs is different than for a lot of younger people. I immediately see race/ethnicity variable when I see these signs. I do not get these "vibes" if a sign simply points to the health regs about shirts and shoes. I also know that there are laws/regs in some places in which it is illegal to post the "We refuse the right to refuse service to anyone" sign. The "anyone" is the problem.

Another thought- I know that I could have subjected to legal action (as well as licensure infractions) if I had refused to see patients for psychotherapy based upon their religious beliefs.