Cobretti2 said:
At the end of the day who cares though? Is it wrong and stupid and the person saying all that a racist fuck? sure But look on the flip side, we are in the world of social media, leave them a bad review and let the people crucify them by not going to those places to do their shopping. This is how a democracy works. Smart people will survive in business, racist pricks will not. I know it still doesn't make it right, but I would rather see the person for who they are and give my money to a person who is accepting of others. Same goes for this cake shop. I don't get why we still debating it a month later lol. There is 100s of cake shops, just go to another. Leave this one a bad review and watch it's business decline with time.
|
| Mr_No said: Even if I don't agree with the ruling, the business has the right to do what they want, even if it is due to religious reasons. The caveats of a free market. However, as in any capitalist system, people need to vote with their wallets and not support this kind of behavior. They're masking their unwillingness and bigotry by religious reasons, and with that I disagree. |
I see where you guys are coming from with this, and it might work in today's day and age, I'm just wondering, how would you deal with it if people started discriminating for other religious reasons? Say for example, that an atheist decides not to serve Christians because he believes that religion is evil. I imagine you'd advocate for the same "vote with your wallet" approach or "leave a bad review" approach. Free market approaches, I get it. But with Christianity on the decline, and non-religious people making up 30% of the nation and growing, one day Christians could be a minority. Lets say this atheist exists in a future America where Christians are as common as Jews and Muslims are now. Non-religious people are the vast majority, and it's as common to look down upon it as it is to look down on gays now. If the atheist shop owner defines his religious stance as promoting non-religion, he could claim under this court decision that he should be able to discriminate against Christians for religious freedom reasons. Is that fair for the Christian? Shouldn't he be able to participate equally in society regardless of his religious views? You might say yes, but in this future, there probably wouldn't be much of an outcry, and the atheist would still get plenty of business because most people in this future aren't Christian, don't care, and many even look down on Christians. A free market solution will never come.
And don't try to answer this with "oh that'll never happen" because a) you don't know that and b) it's just a hypothetical to illustrate my point that the free market isn't always going to care enough to solve the problem. A fair democracy doesn't rely on the free market to enforce fairness, it lets everyone participate in society equally (unless someone violates someone else's rights, like a murderer, who then doesn't get to participate and is instead jailed).
