Sucks doesnt it? Fuck them. If two butt pirates want to come eat breakfast at some shit hole diner in Indiana, kicking them out without a good reason, like say they started blowing each other in front of other patrons, should be grounds for a law suit.
So youre punishing moreso for the thought/logic behind the act and not the act itself? Isnt that like a thought crime? Hate crime? Thats an awful slippery slope.....
I guess I wonder how your "they shouldn't be punished either, let the market sort that out" statement fits into this.
Lol no, though nice try to set yourself on the high ground while defending bigotry.
The point i was trying to make is that government should not be passing laws one way or another on this topic. If a business wants to descriminate, they will be boycotted by a portion of the population and possibly go out of business. The getting sued part is part of reality in our society. I can go sue anyone for anything, you know that.
No different than excluding blacks or jews from your store. If you want to open a public store in this country it has to be open to the public.
Uhhh... well... no, not really. You can sue anyone for anything, sure, and quickly you'll find yourself sanctioned and/or barred from the courthouse. If you sue on this type of discrimination, you're suing because of discrimination which is only illegal because the government HAS passed laws against it... and judicial action is just action by the government to enforce its laws/rules anyway. So any way you slice it, its government action.
The anti discrimination laws are not specific to gays though. There should not be laws passes specifically for some groups, we have anti discrimination laws in existence, that should be sufficient.
The anti-discrimination laws already apply to some groups and not others; the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (you should go read it) protects against discrimination based on race, color, sex, national origin, or religion. So theoretically, it's perfectly legal under that statute to discriminate against gays. Sexual orientation isn't protected. So you see why a law would need to be passed protecting that group explicitly, unless they want to say "it is against the law to discriminate on the basis of membership in any group", but then you can get some ridiculous interpretations like "you can't throw me out of your store for destroying the displays because I am a member of the group of people that likes to destroy things in stores."
Well yea. You can kill anyone you want too... I didn't say there wouldn't be consequences.
Earlier you said that people discriminating against gays consider being sued a punishment. How can they be sued if "gay" is not protected as you claim in this post? If the cousin fuckers want to kick gays out of their stores, let their businesses fail. In the times of social media, shit like that wont fly for long.
They're not protected in the federal law. They are in some state and local level anti-discrimination laws. That's also an area that the religious freedom brigade is taking their efforts to. Passing state laws that prohibit local level anti-discrimination provisions from exceeding those of the state.
That's an interesting take on property rights. The reason these protections are needed is because courts have destroyed such rights over the last 100 years.
When you are running a business open to the public, a business supported by public infrastructure, your "rights" end right when you decide to toss some faggot out of your store because jesus told you to. If you do so, you should be open to litigation. But passing laws specifically protecting certain "classes" of people is fucking dumb. We have laws that are more or less blanket. If not, they should be made so. No need for more bullshit laws that can bog down courts even further because someone yelled "faggot" in their kitchen and some blue hair got offended.
MOVE IT BACK TO MILWAUKEE YOU FUCKS
