Do Businesses Have the Right to Refuse Service Based on Moral/Religious Objections?

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by julieisafemme

Ok but what if you make the 100 cupcakes and they are a huge hit and then the rest of the bigot brigade is beating down your door for more cupcakes with ever increasing demands for horribly offensive sweets?

The bakery owner is self-employed and not working as part of a system or for the state. If I work for someone else then I am under their values and morals. Would you work for the confederate flag making baker?

Firstly - I don't understand why some of you are insisting on equating being gay with belonging to a hate group. For the sake of your own self-esteem I really do hope that you know that it's different.

Secondly - Slippery slope argument.

Thirdly - I want to know, then, since you think it's okay to refuse services to people just for being gay - do you think that there should be no protected classes of people at all? Do you think that business owners should get to turn people away for being Asian? Hindu? I know Rand Paul thinks that business owners should get to do that, so it's not a totally far-fetched fringe notion.

And if you don't think that business owners should be able to turn people away because of their race or their religion - why do you think it's okay to turn people away because of their sexual orientation?

[julieisafemme]

I do understand the difference and I never said it was ok for anyone to refuse service to someone because they are gay. I don't see where anyone is equating being gay with belonging to a hate group. I think people might be using that to pose the question about something that is really intolerable to us as a group as us being gay might be to another group.

The place we are talking about in Canada where this happened already has a law that says what the flower shop owner did is illegal? Is that correct? What she did is against the law. So whether I or anyone else thinks she has the right to do it or not it is against the law.

Yes Rand Paul says that and a lot of other things and represents that part of American culture that is always at odds with and suspicious of government. It is not far fetched or fringe. It is pretty mainstream. I think, based on what Suebee said, Canadians have a different view of their government?

This whole conversation is a slippery slope. The example I used in my first post was the only acceptable use of religion based refusal of service I could envision. Kosher establishment, non-kosher food brought in, please leave immediately. The person could dump the food or drink and then come back in and be served. Like you said you can't take the gay off.

I would not want to serve the confederate flag cupcake person. Others might not want to serve me.

Originally Posted by betenoire

Firstly - I don't understand why some of you are insisting on equating being gay with belonging to a hate group. For the sake of your own self-esteem I really do hope that you know that it's different.

Secondly - Slippery slope argument.

Thirdly - I want to know, then, since you think it's okay to refuse services to people just for being gay - do you think that there should be no protected classes of people at all? Do you think that business owners should get to turn people away for being Asian? Hindu? I know Rand Paul thinks that business owners should get to do that, so it's not a totally far-fetched fringe notion.

And if you don't think that business owners should be able to turn people away because of their race or their religion - why do you think it's okay to turn people away because of their sexual orientation?