![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A topic for discussion
Jan. 31st, 2012 05:03 pmI know that people's blogs (LJs, Facebooks, etc.) often tend to bring hive-mind like agreement rather than discussion. Partially because sometimes people feel it's offensive to disagree (and I will mention again that I always welcome discussion on this journal, even/especially if you disagree with something I've posted), and partially because the Internet is increasingly designed to automatedly filter out differing opinions. (For more on automated homogenizing filtering, see this short but excellent TED talk.)
Anyway, the topic I would like to discuss here is the rights of private businesses to discriminate. That's admittedly a bit broad, and while![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
2h2o noted that I've been arguing mandatory health insurance on Facebook, what I want to start with discussing here (although I'm happy for conversation to branch out) is specifically the topic of the right of a private business owner to deny service to someone.
This topic is on my mind because of two recent news stories. Four different florist companies in Cranston refused to deliver flowers to a young atheist girl who had demanded that the local public school take down a prayer banner. And just recently, a diner owner refused service to a homophobic senator who authored the "Don't Say Gay" bill.
I realize the cases are not quite identical, as we might have different standards for high school students and senators, and I myself am much more sympathetic to someone supporting the first amendment separation of church and state than I am to someone spewing homophobia and using that as a guiding principle to enact legislation.
And yet, as someone who always has consistency (hobgoblin or not) in the forefront of my mind, I can't help just asking the larger question: Should private businesses, as a rule, be able to deny service to people? My instinct is to see this as binary, either saying "There's no discrimination allowed when you're a business" or "Private owners should be able to serve who they want." But I feel that there are cases where most people would want owners to be able to refuse service (The murderer of Jack's family, now out on parole, wants to eat at Jack's deli), and cases where most people would want owners to be forced to provide service (Jack doesn't want to serve black people at his lunch counter).
I welcome your thoughts.
Anyway, the topic I would like to discuss here is the rights of private businesses to discriminate. That's admittedly a bit broad, and while
2h2o noted that I've been arguing mandatory health insurance on Facebook, what I want to start with discussing here (although I'm happy for conversation to branch out) is specifically the topic of the right of a private business owner to deny service to someone.This topic is on my mind because of two recent news stories. Four different florist companies in Cranston refused to deliver flowers to a young atheist girl who had demanded that the local public school take down a prayer banner. And just recently, a diner owner refused service to a homophobic senator who authored the "Don't Say Gay" bill.
I realize the cases are not quite identical, as we might have different standards for high school students and senators, and I myself am much more sympathetic to someone supporting the first amendment separation of church and state than I am to someone spewing homophobia and using that as a guiding principle to enact legislation.
And yet, as someone who always has consistency (hobgoblin or not) in the forefront of my mind, I can't help just asking the larger question: Should private businesses, as a rule, be able to deny service to people? My instinct is to see this as binary, either saying "There's no discrimination allowed when you're a business" or "Private owners should be able to serve who they want." But I feel that there are cases where most people would want owners to be able to refuse service (The murderer of Jack's family, now out on parole, wants to eat at Jack's deli), and cases where most people would want owners to be forced to provide service (Jack doesn't want to serve black people at his lunch counter).
I welcome your thoughts.
