Kasz216 said:
Leadified said:
SocialistSlayer said:
no, because said muslim waiter was volunterly offering his services and the business was volunterly employing him. No one was forced to do anything, he is free to leave, and the business is free to fire him.
back to the Op, the business should be able to volunterrly offer their services, and customers should be able to volunterly accept their service. You are advocating for compulsery labor, which is slavery.
|
You're already allowed to deny people of your services if they violate your rights. You're just not allowed to deny someone solely based on discrimination on things like race, sex or sexuality. All this bill does is give a legal defence to a business, so if a gay couple were to sue them they can't win because the business did not break the law.
The only people who profit are those who dislike LGBT people and this bill gives them the impression that the Republican party is acutally doing something. So they will continue to support them in the next election, even if it means continuously voting for people who pass self-destructing legislation.
|
Actually I'm pretty sure your totally allowed to deny people service soley due to sexuality. I mean

It might not be 1 to 1, but i gotta think refusal to service and being able to fire are fairly even in standing.
|
Makes the whole situation even less suprising then, similar laws were proposed in Kansas and Tennesee which are both orange states, so all in all the only reason they're passing this law is because why not, they might be able to get away with it.