cacman wrote:A truly 'free market' should not discriminate or fine a business for choosing not to do business with a customer for ANY reason. Nor does that make the business or owner a 'hateful jag-off' as you say. Any business has the right to refuse or not do business with whomever they choose and without explanation. The problem with the 'cake incident' is the women expressed her religious beliefs over a politically-charged topic, and it cost her for her beliefs and statement. Unfortunately she was probably baited just like Walmart and the Confederate Flag/ISIS flag cake sale incident.
I'm in Advertising. Let's say you ask me to design a marketing campaign in support of attacking a homeless person over a dog. I turn-down the job offer. I don't have to give you a reason why I don't want the job. I can simply say 'I don't have the time, I can't meet the deadline' or 'that's beyond my area of expertise'. You can't sue me or fine me for refusing the job offer, or make me provide said campaign. But the cake lady was ridiculed and threatened on national news channels then fined for speaking the truth about her religious belief. Instead she could have offered some BS line of why she wouldn't do the job. Don't know about you, but most are taught to always speak the truth. That doesn't mean you have to carry a 'sign' saying you do.
How do you like that 'No Smoking' sign (forced by law) at your local pub? Isn't that a form of discrimination? Where's that business owner's free-market rights to choose whom they wish to do business with???
Let's start from the bottom of your ridiculous arguments and work up...
First, a "no smoking"sign is NOT a form of discrimination. You and I are not "smokers". We're people, we occasionally smoke. I don't like rules telling businesses whether they can allow or disallow smoking any more than you do, but to call it discrimination is to clearly point out that you don't understand the word discrimination.
Secondly, you'd be free to tell me you won't create an advertising campaign for beating homeless dog stompers. That's free market. I'm free to go on to yelp and post a review about your business stating you're a homeless dog stomper lover, and tell my friends. I can tell the humane society that you love homeless dog stompers and think dog stomping is acceptable, and they shouldn't use your services... etc etc etc. That also is free market. Once information is out, and disseminates (that a bakery hates the gays... that you love dog stompers... then it's allowed to influence said free market). If I like dog stompers, I'd be more likely to use your services, if I like dogs and hate the homeless, I'd be less likely to use your services. You can't both stand for your personal convictions AND expect not to be judged on them, that's simply childish. (as for state fines, I don't personally agree that there should be a state fine, but you're the one that won't shut up about state's rights... so you should be ok with a state exercising them).
Which brings us to the top of your ridiculousness.... Simply put, a business is judged on more than the product it provides, especially if there are mutliple businesses which provide it. You said yourself you would not buy Westboro baptist wedding cake. That's judging a business based on whatever convictions they feel like expressing. What you seem to want is some fantasy world where a business owner can spout any stupid conviction they may have, but customers are still required to purchase goods from them if they were planning on before. That sounds like some sort of communism....
