Re: Indiana governor signs bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers
Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2015 5:43 pm
Let me go ahead and pause you for a moment, because I think you've hit on one of the key portions of the argument....
The only answer I can think of would be "the government." Basically, the state would be the ones to come in and force businesses to "play nice" with the community, regardless of the wishes of the business owners.
And that's where I draw the line. The government should NOT have the ability or "right" to force people to associate with people - customers, organizations, faiths, whatever - that they don't want to. Government using force to make everyone behave the way the government wants them to is the path to tyranny. In my opinion, that is something that anyone who values freedom needs to oppose. Yes, it means defending the rights of people we may disagree vehemently with. But if we start restricting the rights of select groups of people, where will it end?
So what would be the consequences of a business or an organization that does decide to refuse service to whoever, for whatever reason? Who is the one responsible for determining what is allowed to be refused, and what isn't? And who would enforce these rules?RoosterOnAStick wrote: If it is the former, then I would say they do not have a right to refuse service cause again, all they are doing is making food. ... They have no right to refuse service in the case of the former.
The only answer I can think of would be "the government." Basically, the state would be the ones to come in and force businesses to "play nice" with the community, regardless of the wishes of the business owners.
And that's where I draw the line. The government should NOT have the ability or "right" to force people to associate with people - customers, organizations, faiths, whatever - that they don't want to. Government using force to make everyone behave the way the government wants them to is the path to tyranny. In my opinion, that is something that anyone who values freedom needs to oppose. Yes, it means defending the rights of people we may disagree vehemently with. But if we start restricting the rights of select groups of people, where will it end?