You see this all started because of that bakery...
This is where it gets tricky for me. On the one hand, I can see the bakers having the right to refuse on religious grounds. On the other hand, when you look deeper into it, you have to ask, if it is ok to discriminate based on religion, why isn't it ok to discriminate on race? Where is the line and who decides what is ok and isn't? Does it have to be an all or one proposition, or can there be a middle ground? Why should a business be allowed to discriminate at all?There’s a snarky joke in here somewhere, I’m sure of it. Something about private businesses denying service to Americans...
Nah, lost it.
The issue for many people is that if you do not allow private businesses to discriminate, you are forcing them to labor against their will. I've not seen many people who wish to be discriminatory, only people who believe involuntary servitude is wrong even for the best of reasons. You bring up a good point ('why is one okay but not the other?') On a logical basis, the principle behind anti-discrimination law is not applied broadly. The legislature stepped in regarding race because it was an issue large enough to garner support. This was a specific application of law and disregards any parallels. You could say this is finding middle ground, because it is inconsistent with other criteria where discrimination IS allowed. People who disagree with prohibiting religious discrimination most likely believe that a business's discrimination may be detestable, but the use of the legal system to punish those who do so is a subversion of the 13th amendment which bars involuntary servitude. Discriminating against customers for racial reasons is obviously reprehensible, but you won't find many people openly drawing an unbroken line in policy. What you will find is a lot of middle ground.
Yep, gotta love Georgia.
Saw that on ArmyWTF
Oh crap! Just to go on record here, I do not have half a dozen 30 shot 5.56 mags. I gave them to my Huskey as a play toy a long time ago.
