Christian Skate Night is Unconstitutional

If asinine applications of law such as this are upheld, what are some of the consequences? Chick-Filet would have to stop the franchise rule of Sunday closing, as this 'discriminates' against sabbatarians or anyone for whom Sunday is not a 'day of rest.' The cases about retail stores at Christmas would be settled-- it would be discrimination to wish a customer "Merry Christmas," as this prefers Christianity over any other 'religion', and probably even wishing "Happy Holiday" would be discriminating, as this indicates the customer has holidays, and many have no days at all as holy.

Most cases involving public accomodation services recently have been about pharmacies refusing to sell birth control prescriptions. By many rulings here, pharmacists do not have the same rights to accomodation of their religion as sabbatarians have to not be required to work on their 7th day, or some religionists have to not conform to hair or headscarf rules. If the pharmacy and birth control rules stand up, then it should be illegal to run a kosher delicatessen, as this discriminates against the majority of people who do not observe kosher rules.

All this is stupid. Businessperson should be allowed to offer services in line with their religious beliefs, or use decor or music according to those themes. Where the line should be drawn is if they refuse service to a customer or client based on that customer or client's beliefs or the perception of such. This does not mean that every product or every service related to the business must be provided, or that businesses must become self-censoring in regard to the arts.

 

3-page warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 10:30 p.m. ET by one of the moderators.

Lady Eagle
Moderator

 

A business is not an entity unto itself. It exists in a community and under the rules and protection of the government. Moreover, it uses public infrastructure like roads, police, fire departments and courts that are paid for by tax dollars. In fact the very exchange - money - used in business is backed by the US government. So while a business might not receive tax dollars directly, it does so indirectly in the form of services funded by tax dollars. Therefore the people, through their government, have a right to demand that a business not practice discrimination as a condition of doing business.

 

Then, in Rooselk's example, no one is allowed to discriminate for any reason, thus:

*gay ministers must be allowed to serve in your church.
*women's only locker rooms must allow men.
*strip clubs must allow minors.

All these examples show...discrimination. If there is any exclusivity to any entity, it is therefore discriminatory. Not all discrimination is wrong. Some is necessary. "You drove on a road to get here, so thus you have no right to decide how to operate your private property" is a scary proposition, rooselk. What you describe is an all-powerful government that completely usurps individuals' rights to conduct their own affairs. Yikes.

 

rbell, those are different issues. To the larger issue you have raised I will only say that under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment a church has the right to practice its' beliefs in ways that may differ from the larger society. For this reason the state cannot compel that "gay ministers must be allowed to serve in your church." For instance, while many states have laws which state that men and women are equal under the law, the state does not compel churches to extend the ordination of ministers and priests to women. A business and a church are two separate entities.

 

Under this reasoning, then, none of us have any individual rights - we are all under the thumb of the collective. We are Borg.

I reject such reasoning. And I do not believe that resistance to such thinking is futile. I refuse to be assimilated.

 

KenH, I would disagree. We most certainly have individual rights, many of which are spelled out in our Bill of Rights. But I am neither a libertarian nor an anarchist. Since I take seriously the proposition that under the Constitution our government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people" I believe that the people have certain prerogatives as well. Among those prerogatives is the right of the people to ban discrimination in public accomodations, employment, etc.

 

Very well stated, Rooselk.

 

I disagree. Despite any "good intentions" involved that is the road to fascism.

By the way I am not an anarchist. I believe as our Founding Fathers did that the government that governs least, governs best.

 

A business is not a public entity. It is a private entity. That is why the Boy Scouts continue to win their cases against the forces trying to force homosexuality on a private organization that has a right to fellowship with whom it pleases.

 

What is the difference between a private business having a senior discount, military discount, or Christian (church attendance) discount? Nothing, whatever promotion the business wants to use is fine.

What is the difference between a private business having a country night, oldies night, rock night, or a Christian night? Nothing, whatever the business want to do is fine.

The Government has absolutely no business telling the private business what to do in these cases. If the Civil Rights Act contradicts the Constitution of the US, then I will follow the Constitution and forget the Civil Rights Act.