Most excellent. They got exactly what they deserve. And thanks Blondie for that info; damn litigious Canadians!!! Eh!
We discuss this topic every few months it seems. And the responses are the same: those who believe it is not a constitutional right on one side, and those who believe that a business should be able to do what it wishes on the other (good luck with that). And side 1 always wins, because few if any courts in the US have ever found that a business selling commercial services to the general public has a First Amendment right to turn away customers on a discriminatory basis.
And yes, there was a recent court case where the KKK won a lawsuit against a bakery that wouldn't bake them a cake because it offended the owner's religious beliefs. Google it. That is a specious (that means the argument/statement sounds reasonable but is actually woo (yes, I stole Viviane’s word – deal with it) with a bow on it) argument.
Like it or not, the courts have ruled that bakers, photographers, and other businesses are exactly that — businesses. Their business decisions are not speech; they are commercial transactions that are open to the entire public regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnic origin (the original Civil rights Laws circa 1964) and disabilities (ADA – circa 1990) and now sexual orientation based on numerous recent cases. Or Democrats, Republicans, the KKK, the Boy Scouts, Rotary Club or the Black Panthers (are they even still around?), as long as these groups are operating legally and aren’t making requests for services or products that are seditious, illegal or that violate legitimate business interests (e.g., a restaurant can require shoes/shirts for service).
The courts have consistently ruled that free speech rights don’t trump civil rights laws guarded by the Constitution. Businesses are public accommodations, not private individuals. There is no difference between a baker and a bank. Either the business offers its services to everyone, or it doesn’t.
ChaseSerious is one of our legal experts, and he can speak much more eloquently than I on this topic, but the courts have consistently ruled in the same manner for decades. The real problem is with individuals thinking they have rights that they do not have. Nor should they have.
