Should businesses have the right to refuse service?

Should businesses have the right to refuse service? To gays, LGBT, or any other reason?

I'm actually in opposition to this, I don't think they should have the right to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason.

  • No
    63% (55)36% (37)49% (92)Vote
  • Yes
    37% (32)64% (65)51% (97)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
Updates:
bump
bump.

0|0
42|77

Most Helpful Girl

Most Helpful Guy

  • Denying access to goods to any person because of their gender, sexuality, race, etc. is immoral and should be illegal. Imagine if you became starved because no one would sell you food because you were bisexual. Not like that should be any of their business in the first place, but there has to be a line drawn.

    1|1
    0|0

What Girls Said 41

  • No, I can't see any reason why they would need to. How much interaction do you really have with someone at a store?

    "Hey, can you ring these up for me?"

    "No, we don't serve gays here."

    "I'm literally buying a sweater. Whatever, it looks like it would fall apart in the wash like your sex life anyway."

    7|1
    0|0
  • Yes. It is their business, founded by them, funded by them. Rights are a two way street.

    If a gay couple goes into a bakery and wants a wedding cake, but the owner is against gays for whatever reason (religious, whatever) does the gay couple have the right to demand he bake the cake? Technically, now the gay couple is being discriminatory by disregarding the rights of the baker!

    It is a slippery slope. Personally, if a baker is against the LGBT lifestyle, I wouldn't want him to bake my cake anyway. I'd leave his shop and go to the hundreds of surrounding bakeries that don't care.

    So typical of people to go to extremes. Since Mr Bob is against gays, I must FORCE him to bake my cake with legal action for no other reason than to prove I can. Never mind that my actions are now causing more of the type of rift I claim to want to mend.

    I don't care about how someone lives and loves, personally. But people have as much of a right to dislike it as people have to live it. Right or wrong, I have the right to refuse my nonessential services based on whatever reason I choose, from hair color to religion to lifestyle choices.

    And if I do refuse to serve you, you have the right to shred my business via facebook, etc. But you do NOT have the right to force me to serve you.

    (Disclaimer: the use of "I" and "you" are strictly generic for the purpose of debate and do not reflect my personal view of lifestyle choices)

    2|0
    0|0
    • What rights of the baker? The gay couple isn't forcing the baker to engage in gay sex with them. They're asking for a cake. That's all.

    • Show All
    • The baker doesn't have to accept what they're doing, all they're asking for is for the baker to bake a cake, which doesn't violate any of his rights. He would only be doing his job. Baking a cake for a gay couple is not the same as engaging in gay sex or accepting gay couples, he's literally just doing his job. The sexuality of the baker's customers should not matter at all, and does not somehow prohibit him from baking a cake.

    • @lumos I totally do see your point, however there are those who are so rabidly anti-gay that to bake the cake would imply they support the marriage. In my very humble opinion, he has the right to be a d****e-b*g.

      You just can't legislate acceptable behavior, I'm afraidn

  • I don't get this logic "I don't like you so I will let you cause me to lose business HA! TAKE THAT!" This is a case of needing to save the idiot bigots from themselves. Because if you refuse people service because they are a minority then people who are not your targeted minority will inevitably get pissed and stop using your business too.

    1|2
    0|0
    • So? Then they go bankrupt. It's none of your concern, right?

    • Show All
    • *unintelligent

    • Which was perpetrated by the government to begin with. So even if there were such a law, they would have just removed that law. Not exactly a reliable comparison.

  • No they shouldn't!

    3|1
    0|0
  • In the United States, there are about 20 states that have blanket legislation against discrimination by sexual orientation in public places.
    In other words -- In these states, NO, businesses cannot legally refuse to serve gay people.

    You can check the list here:
    www.aclu.org/.../non-discrimination-laws-state-state-information-map

    In some of the other states, conservative legislators have attempted to introduce "religious freedom" laws that are basically just right-to-discriminate-against-gays laws in disguise. For the most part, those haven't gone over too well. The few that have passed, have mostly been struck down or severely crippled by (fortunately sane) courts and judges.

    I don't know about other countries.

    Considering that some European countries are even starting to introduce things like pedestrian signals that show gay couples, though, I'd imagine that gay patrons are pretty good to go across the European continent.
    Some recent scenery from Vienna:
    media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/Traffic.jpg

    0|0
    0|0
    • I don't know about every single country, but in Europe we're usually entitled to refuse service to whomever we feel is not welcome to our establishment for their behaviour, gay or not.
      In other words, I have never heard of a private establishment being obliged by law to serve someone in particular.

    • Show All
    • @katiesmuff No, no, that's way wrong. Civil-rights legislation absolutely applies to ALL service businesses.

      I mean, I think I may just be misinterpreting you.

      The way I'm reading yr words, they SEEM to imply that, if I run (say) a restaurant, then, as long as I fund the restaurant completely out of my own pocket, then, I would totally be within my legal rights to enact a policy like "Oh, I don't think I'll be serving black people at my restaurant", or, "I won't be serving any women who are here without male company."

      I mean... well, NO. Fuck no. That's so totally not how it works.
      If I did those things, then at the very least I'd be forking over millions of dollars to the Justice Department (definitely enough to bankrupt the business)... and, I don't remember the legalities, but I might well serve federal prison time if the policies could be traced soundly enough back to my leadership.

      What country do you live in? (Can't see yr profile)

    • I live in the US and I do believe that right or wrong if I own the business then I have the right to serve who I wish. Doesn't mean I think it would be a brilliant idea, but yes you should have the right to do it if you so choose.

  • If they're gonna refuse service to anybody, it should be rude people lol. But that's all.

    6|0
    0|0
  • Yes, actually, they should. A business has every right to refuse service to someone. It is THEIR business, and they are providing the service. They don't HAVE to provide it to everyone.
    However, that right stops, like all rights, when it starts to interfere with the rights of another person. Everyone has the right to be treated fairly, despite skin colour, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.
    My favourite way of explaining this is 'Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins', meaning that you have a right to do anything you want, until it infringes on the rights of another person.
    So really, your question is way too vague. A business has a right to refuse service to someone for a legitimate reason. They do NOT have a right to refuse service based on discrimination.

    You say your stance is that a business shouldn't be able to refuse service for any reason. That would mean that they would have to serve aggressive, violent, and ill mannered people with no right to refuse. That's not ok.

    2|1
    0|0
  • If they could do that for lgbt people, then I wouldn't serve Christians in my business, people with big noses, anyone who likes Justin Beiber, our anyone who shops at aeropostle. See how many people would outrage at me?

    8|1
    0|0
    • Sure, people would be outraged. But, your right to refuse service shouldn't be up for a vote, any more than your right of free speech.

    • Show All
    • @frozenhorizon Sure they do all the public infrastructure that everyone benefits from, national grid etc.

    • But I'm christian and have a big nose, and you're my buddy

  • Basically yes they should be able serve only those they want. It is their business, their money and we live in a country where freedom has many meanings such as anyone may belong to any religion they choose, they can be whoever they choose to be, they are able to have or prevent anyone to enter their home, and a private business owner should be able to choose who they want to do business with regardless of reasons. This would include corporations operating with private funds better known as stockholders.
    I also believe that any type of business operating with public money (taxpayer money) should NOT be able to select who they wish to service. Everyone should have equal opportunity here.

    2|0
    0|0
  • Businesses can refuse service already. But their reasons have to apply to everyone and not just some people or protected classes of people.

    For instance if a store says "No shirt, no shoes, no service" that's acceptable because it's a reasonable expectation that everyone has shoes and shirts. Whereas denying service based on their religion is unacceptable because the first amendment protects freedom of religion and people cannot be discriminated against because of they practice or don't practice that religion.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I mean it is their business, so yes they can.
    Is it wrong, yes. But they can.

    4|4
    0|0
    • It's like "I refuse to install a fire extinguisher"

    • Show All
    • Exactly. If they refuse service to too many people, they will go bankrupt. The problem fixes itself. That's why Capitalism is so great.

    • @ShayanMortazavi1 Dude I hear ya -- and I basically AM capitalism / the American dream, more or less personified -- but, that does depend on having public policy reach a certain point. When court rulings are ahead of their time, and certain areas are behind theirs, that exact pendulum can swing the other way, and with a vengeance.

      Have you read much about the South directly post-integration (= right after the '64 civil rights act)?
      There were a lot of businesses, especially sit-down diners and such, that had to start serving black people to comply with the new law -- but that would LOSE their principal clientele (= white people) if they did so.

      Some of the owners were totally pro-integration, too, which made it even more painful for them. It became a rock-vs-hard-place situation 4sho: (1) follow the law -- and their conscience -- and go broke, OR (2) stay in business by breaking the law AND getting black marks on their souls.
      Glad I didn't grow up there, that's all.

  • People are only talking about this law in relation to businesses denying services to members of the LGBT community. That's a problem, but there is a bigger problem at hand. This is a law that includes religion. What if I'm a bigoted Christian that wants to deny service to Muslims? What if I'm a Muslim that wants to deny services to Jews? What if I'm a white person who goes to a Methodist church and wants to discriminate against a black person who is Baptist? These are all repercussions of this new law. It's being championed as a law for religious freedom when in fact it is a step backwards. This law pits people against each other and is thinly veiled prejudice with the potential for blatant racism. I'm glad I don't live in Mississippi.

    2|0
    0|0
  • Depends on for what. Definitely not if it's based on the person being denied being part of a protected class of people (a certain race, gender, religion, sexual orientation). But denying service for something reasonable, like the person being disruptive or an asshole, or just in some condition making their buying whatever the business is selling a bad idea, then it's entirely reasonable.

    Basically, segregation is not okay. Denying people based on other factors may be.

    1|0
    0|0
  • absolutely not. that's the most ridiculous shit ever. u can't have a government that promotes equality then have a business that opposes it by discrimination.

    2|0
    0|0
    • Equality means what? Equality of rights. But, what rights do we have? That is a question that few people bother even to try to answer, these days.

    • @evenlift that's exactly right. i think people just use equality as an overarching term without considering what that entails.

  • If someone is refused to be sold something because of their gender/sex and sexuality, yea, that's pretty fucked up, and should be illegal. I think all forms of discrimination are wrong. The only thing that makes me falter is when it comes to things like wedding stuff (cake, photography) etc. I wouldn't want someone who thought my love was unpure to be paid to be at my wedding/help my wedding go along. I wouldn't want to be forced to give services to a neo-nazi wedding, no thanks. But the flip side is that for some people, maybe all they have in their area is people who will refuse them service, then we're going backwards when people can be denied service because of where they live and for being who they are. For pretty much everything else (I can't think of any exception) it's 100% wrong for companies to deny someone a service.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I think they should have the right o refuse service unless it is an essential service. However, the rest of society reserves the right to call them out on being bigoted dick bags and to boycott them, smear them in media, etc.

    1|2
    0|0
  • I realize your focus here but the right to refuse service is important. I've spent years in customer service. People get violent people get verbally abusive. I do believe this is what the law was made for. But people focus on only the people that hate. People that are against colour or religion or sexual preference.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Wtf? How are most people in favour of refusing service to a person because of their sexuality? That's disgusting, I'm embarrassed so many are voting Yes. Who ever did vote yes, you are a disgrace. Get with the times.

    0|1
    0|0
    • You're confusing the endorsement of the right to refuse service with the endorsement of every act of refusal of service. For comparison, I approve of freedom of speech. That doesn't mean that I approve of every act of speech.

      The right to have sex with a consenting, same-sex adult and the right to refuse service to a person based on his or her sexuality are in fact two aspects of the same fundamental right: the right to do any activity that is not an initiation of force against someone else. You can't logically defend one without defending the other.

  • why can't people keep their personal beliefs out of their professional lives?

    5|0
    0|0
  • Private businesses should be able to do what they want. The public ones, not so much.

    I know some people got sued and lost their business because they didn't want to make a wedding cake for two girls. They're against gay marriage by religion and suffered financial hardship because of their opinion. If someone doesn't want to serve you and has a legit reason, just go somewhere else and leave them alone. Not that big of a deal to walk away when you're the one trying to barge in and change people's lifestyles and beliefs.

    0|1
    0|0
  • I've worked in customer service before and this picture sums up my stance
    rs20.pbsrc.com/.../byiconomiconnoassholes.jpg~c200

    1|1
    0|0
    • Yeah, that's great, and if you have the government creating laws that require serving people to prevent discrimination, you just know there will end up being cases where actual assholes use the law unfairly.

  • No. Because what about regions that are mostly made up of small businesse? If you get a small town with small minds that can lead to effective segregation.

    The government can and should place restrictions on all commerce to prevent that kind of thing from happening

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes, but the people also have the right to boycott the business, give it shitty reviews etc.
    I mean in the end they're just screwing themselves over.

    2|1
    0|0
  • I don't think they should have the right to refuse service due to religion, race, or sexuality. But there are some cases in which they should be allowed to deny someone service, but that being based on individual behavior. (as in being disruptive or rude)

    0|0
    0|0
    • Ahh but i suppose it is ok for them to refuse service because of disability is it.

    • @MarkSXV I knew I was forgetting something, no they should not be denied because of a disability, both physical and mental disabilities. Thank you.

  • They should and do have the right to refuse service and even to kick somebody out actually but not for those reasons.
    An actual reason would be when somebody is dead drunk and a risk of safety for anyone else in the store.

    0|0
    0|0
  • YES! Rude people! If customers are rude to staff, then management should have the right to ask them to leave. No one should have to work in an environment where they are insulted by customers. ( as often happens in retail or hospitality)

    0|0
    0|0
  • Honestly?
    As a bi chick, I wish people didn't feel the desire to deny service to LGBTQ+ people.
    However.
    I'd rather a business be able to say "no" than poison my cake or some shit.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Unless they are refusing to sell a weapon to someone who is going to use it to hurt others, I do not think they should get to pick and choose who they serve.

    1|0
    0|0
  • They have the right. I really hate when people are cry babies and go to the news and government to complain.

    When I got married to my wife and we were looking for our wedding cake, some bakeries didn't want to make us the cake, we just say thanks and continued searching, we didn't go complaining about them.

    Everyone has the right to believe whan they want, and no one has the right to impose their believes over others.

    Seriously, people should stop being shit and grow up.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Sure if anything the business is fucking itself over by losing a good amount of money and will be looked down upon. Then the owners will suffer greatly due to less people coming after a point and be known as the place that hates certain people.

    0|0
    0|0
  • More from Girls
    11

What Guys Said 76

  • I'm not American but this seems highly unconstitutional and it certainly goes against core values of what the US is (or at least what it claims to be). So no, certainly not.
    Basically, those businesses are saying "I want to have the right to discriminate against you". Well sad day for them cuz discriminating against people is not a right. Just exchange the "gay people" with "negroes" and we're pretty much back in the days of "white only" door signs and separate water fountains. Do we really need to go through all of this bullshit one more time? I hope not.

    4|1
    0|0
    • Show All
    • @UncagedAgent I couldn't disagree more. Yes, I think there are good reasons to refuse to do business with another person where somebody should have the right to refuse. Say, if you're a baker and I have already visited your store three times but always told you that I can't pay and that I will pay you later but ended up giving you no money, then that is a good reason to refuse to do business. Or maybe I was putting up posters all over town saying how crappy your bakery is, that also seems like a justifiable reason. But it should not be legal to refuse to serve someone simply based on what they do in their bedroom. That's privacy and it's nobody else's business.
      Imagine you go to Walmart (or whatever store you usually buy your groceries from) and when you get to the cashier, the manager tells you "sorry, you can't shop here. You're too ugly" or "You can't shop here, you're male. We only let women shop here." Wouldn't that piss you off? I am straight and white, so in my

    • home country Switzerland, I have always been part of the majority and thus not experienced a lot of discrimination. But my girlfriend is from South Korea and I've lived there with her for some time. Both in Korea and in Japan I have experienced racism against me as a white person (in Japan it was actually worse than in Korea) and though I really love both these countries (or maybe BECAUSE of that) it was very hurtful. For the first time in my life I experienced what it means to be treated with hostility and to be refused certain things simply because you were born a different way. It feels incredibly painful and it makes the strongest man want to cry because it is so unbearably unfair. You can do whatever you want, you can be the nicest, most friendly, most good-hearted person and certain people will still treat you with in a condescending way. I strongly believe that nobody should have the legal right to discriminate based on race, sex, sexual orientation, disability and so forth.

  • It would be ridiculous for businesses to do that, but I think they should have the right. A business should have rights to do what they want, even if it hurts their own business. Considering how much of an impact Chick fil A made when they made a statement just referring to marriage, a business would severely be hurt if they were refusing someone business for LGBT or such.

    I guess one example would be smoking. I don't smoke, and I tend to not like being around people who do smoke... However, I think a business (restaurants in particular) should have the right to let people smoke in their establishment if they want to. Some places have made it illegal as has been debated in recent years. (There may be environmental implications and such that make it more complicated, but I'm not looking at that particularly now).

    The government shouldn't dictate what a business can and can't do inside their doors, just like they shouldn't dictate what a person can do on their private property... within reason naturally.

    Likewise, it would be utterly absurd for a business to refuse service to gays, LGBT, or such, but I think they should have the option. It would drive many people away either from being LGBT themselves or from being supporters of the movement. Nevertheless, they should be able to. To do so however, I would say they shouldn't be able to advertise as an "open to the public" institution. I would go as far as to say that they possibly need a way of saying they aren't open to certain people.
    I can't say I would know how they would test something like that though.

    A less harsh example would be a super fancy restaurant turning down someone who showed up wearing flip flops, a tank top, and basketball shorts. To preserve the establishment, they should be able to turn down the guy and refuse him service from... or if a guy comes in with no shirt on. The "No shirt no service" sign shouldn't be an illegal thing to do.
    ----------
    TL;DR; I don't think businesses should turn down people, but I think they should be able to if they wanted to.

    2|2
    0|0
    • That's like saying "No I don't think the chicken should be fried, but I'll fry it anyway"

    • Nah it is more like saying, "I don't think chicken should be fried, but if someone out there wants to fry it and feels it is better that way, they can fry it."

  • An example being used several times here is the wedding cake for a gay couple. I know of at least one bakery, owned by a religious couple, that has existed for years and has sold cakes and made custom cakes for years. During that time they sold generic products to a couple they knew was gay for years. Then the couple wanted a wedding caked made that was for a gay marriage.

    At that point, it was not just selling them a product. Or even putting in effort for a custom cake. At that point it it became about them designing something to glorify something that was personally offensive to them. They refused to remain within their religious beliefs and it cost them dearly.

    They did not refuse service to the couple. They refused a specific service that offended them. They would have done the same regardless of the color, religion, sexuality, etc. of any customer. I believe we go to far when we try to trample their religious beliefs by forcing them to do something offensive, not who they do it for.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yes a business should choose who they serve. No one is entitled to their services.
    There are businesses that refuse service to people not wearing clothing
    c2.staticflickr.com/.../...235973_e8ce7a571e_b.jpg

    The LGBTs and other crybabies who were refused service can go to another store. At the end of the day it's up to the business if it wants to earn $20 of someone or would rather lose that money to prevent a conflict with the customer.

    I'm sure someone will bring up the example of the Jim Crow laws and the discrimination in the South being overturned. This however is a false equivalency since back then the racism was ingrained in the society so very few people would serve Blacks. Nowadays it's much less common. The person can always find another business that will serve them.

    3|4
    0|0
  • If one should have a deeply held religious conviction which prevents you from, say, designing a cake to be used to celebrate a marriage between two men, then you should not be forced to do so. There used to be a commonly used expression in America: "Hey, it's a free country". I never hear it said anymore.

    1|3
    0|0
    • Their view of freedom is forcing another person to do something they don't want to do cuz the particular group they belong to is better than others? I guess.

  • If the service being demanded goes outside the scope of what the business is about, or runs contrary to the mission of the business, or is made on pain of some horrible threat (i. e., extortion), then under the Commerce Clause, the 1st Amendment, the 13th Amendment, the Hobbes Act, and RICO, that small business has EVERY RIGHT to say no.

    To deny that is to deny the republic. And when lobbyists and enemies of the republic, especially in the name of a type of sex pervert, engage in extortion; the extortionist should face criminal charges. Period.

    The idea that one's sick sexual preferences entitle you to extort businesses, sue away someone's entire life savings, make arson threats against them, jail them, etc., simply for not betraying plain reason (or their own beliefs) to pander to your self-interest, is not an idea common in a free republic or civilized nation.

    It is a common pattern of thought in Second and Third World despotic regimes, run by protected thug classes. It is the mindset of Sharia fanatics and jihadists: "Convert, or die!" What we're seeing happen across America now, is just a slow-motion Kristallnacht. Brought to you by the same Templar derivatives that were responsible for the first one.

    They are trying to kick in Lot's door again. They are seeking vengeance for what King Louis IV of France did to them. America - particularly Christian America - wanted to exist somewhere on the face of this planet in peace. Instead, they've become the scapegoat for Nimrod and Sodom to take out all their aggression on, a revenge-by-proxy for ancient defeats and imagined slights.

    That they leave most other groups alone and single out Christian businesses most should tell you where the discrimination really is. Just the Devil and his unwitting pawns, pursuing an ancient vendetta.

    Little else can explain the mad fury, rage, and obsession of these activists with punishing these businesses in ways that violate the 7th and 8th amendments. All they ever do, is violate.

    0|0
    0|0
  • While i think it's a completely pathetic reason ( and what good business turns away customers lol?), I think they should have that right.

    At the end of the day they only hurt themselves, since there is always another guy who is willing to sell.

    3|4
    0|0
    • Exactly. In a free market, irrationality is punished economically.

  • Yes they should.

    People of strong faith have moral objections to certain things, gay marriage is a big thing, it's not that people of faith hate homosexuals or fear them, it's just that they object to their sexual orientation. In a free country people are allowed to not like things people do. Given that they are running a private business they should not be forced to make a wedding cake for example, that is slavery, not business.

    I'm curious, Muslims are against gay marriage as well you know, so which side would liberals fall on if a Muslim baker refused to serve a gay couple?

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes. Otherwise, you support a 'right' to slavery.

    By the way, the endorsement of the right to refuse service does not constitute the endorsement of every act of refusal of service. I support freedom of speech. That does not mean that I consider every speech to be morally good.

    2|2
    0|0
  • Any business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Why are people always going back to just the gays. Before them people constantly refused service to African American bluntly for racial reasons. I think it is funny how the gays are like Look they did not want to serve us because of their moral values so they politely refused. I'm going to get famous sue their asses off and fight for my assumed rights. Back in the old days if a black person walked into the wrong store they refused them service, beat them, called them racial names and got them thrown into jail.

    0|0
    0|0
    • The past is meaningless. I don't want to get discriminated by a business and I have, it's no fun for anybody.

    • Wow I'm saddened by your comment of "the past is meaningless."

  • if a business is privately owned then sure they can decide who they want to do business with

    just the same i have the right to not do business with them and openly campaign against their business practices... if i want

    0|2
    0|0
  • Absolutely. I worked at a hardware store one time. Worked there three months. My manager was a single mom putting herself through college in her late twenties.

    Some prick attorney came in and was trying to argue that his mixed paint was done incorrectly and he wanted a full refund. We had a policy that you cannot return mixed paint. We make sure we sponge the color on the can and dry it before they take off to make sure the color is right.

    This man decided to cuss out my manager belittling her articulating his words real fancy to sound superior to her. He basically said I'm an attorney at the top and you are a peasant and work at a manager as a hardware store. Humiliated my manager and I found her in the office crying after he left.

    He decides to come back in the store for round two and I'm furious at this point. I walked away as my other manager told me to do so. I called on the radio for my coworker to give me a heads up when he left the store.

    I followed him out and he acted like he was being attacked or I was going to physically harm him. I very calmly voiced my opinion and told him is a miserable old man and he is a bully stuck in a mans body. I said people like you don't change you will just continue to put others down the rest of his life. I asked if him if he's alone and he said he was divorced. I said that figures and told him it's pretty obvious why no one would want to be around you.. you are miserable.

    He tried to get all high and mighty on me using fancy words again. I told him that isn't impressing me in the least. He tried to tell me I'm just dumb meathead kid. Told him I'm a former Marine showed him my ink and showed him my college school ID and said I'm an engineering student. I left that man with nothing to say and then I verbally slayed him telling him he's an asshole and he is pathetic and to never come back here again.

    Next time I came to clock in the regional manager was there. Pulled me in his office and they terminated me and then transferred my manager to a different store. That customer still comes back to shop.

    I regretted it at first because I needed money and a job but after getting another job I was actually happy that I did it.

    2|1
    0|0
  • It's their business and they can run it the way they want. On the other hand, nobody has a right to be served by that business. This isn't even a case of one person's right vs another person's right, which is often the case. In this case it's the right of the business owner, and the customer has no right whatsoever.

    0|0
    0|0
  • anyone who says yes deserves to be shot. we had this kinda logic and led to 200+ years of slavery and another 100 years of segregation and still dealing with effects from that. how did that turn out?

    0|1
    0|0
  • There are so many layers to this question - On the surface it is an absolute NO but they should still have the right to refuse individuals/groups who cause trouble or try to interfere with the running of the business (drunks, thieves).
    So absolutely not because you are X/Y/Z but some businesses use the right to refuse individuals who may cause trouble as a cover. On the flip side you could have people out to make mischief deliberately requesting the service of someone they know is uncomfortable with providing the service.
    I would advocate maturity on both sides for example if you are celebrating a same sex wedding, don't go to a fundamentalist religious bakery for your cake - There has to be plenty of gay friendly bakeries out there.

    0|0
    0|0
  • It depends on what "service" they are providing. If they are selling something that they normally sell, no, and I don't know of any business that has had that issue in decades.

    If they are being asked to participate, then they should be able to do whatever they want or don't want for any reason or no reason at all.

    The idea that a fundamentalist Christian or Moslem be required to sell a gay wedding cake (when they don't sell gay wedding cakes), or host a gay wedding is preposterous. It would be like asking a Jewish or Moslem butcher to sell you bacon, or a devout Catholic doctor to be required to perform an abortion. Some might, some might not want to and should not be forced to. The views of those being imposed upon should be respected.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Many businesses have for years reserved the right to refuse service for any reason. Giving them the right to kick people out of their business. From that perspective I do agree they should. But I don't agree they should refuse service for example selling to a gay person a car. But saying all businesses have to conduct businesses with every customer no matter what isn't the answer. There are circumstances where refusing service is just and forcing a business to give up that right is just as wrong in my opinion.

    Depends on the nature of the work in my opinion. Many

    0|0
    0|0
    • The problem with this issue is that it is broad and the current conversation is only focusing on one aspect of the idea.

      If a man comes in and just completely disrespect the staff. Insulting everyone. Calling the place a piece of shit. The owner should have full right to refuse service to that customer.

      But having that right and using it to refuse service to gay people simply for being gay. Mehhh, not cool.

  • Businesses should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

    It's their right. Discrimination isn't right, but neither is forcing your opinion on someone.

    0|1
    0|0
  • It is a fundamental right that each of us should be able to choose with whom we do business, or not.
    When government steps in to compel you to do business with someone with whom you do not wish to do business, that is tyranny.
    Militant homosexuals who go looking for Christian businesses against which they can make vexatious civil rights complaints are doing a splendid job of creating anti-gay hatred where none existed previously.
    I note that none of this militant homosexuals try this crap with Muslim-owned businesses.
    Perhaps Christians should copy the Muslims and begin to throw homosexuals off the tops of tall buildings. It seems to keep the vexatious lawsuits away.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No, there's no legitimate reason to for most business. Your religion is personal, not public. Business is business. You have a problem with someone else's lifestyle? Fine. That's your problem. If you think it's "wrong", then, fine, let the Lord punish them. Judge not lest ye be judged.

    0|0
    0|0
  • How would you feel if you were forced to provide some sort of services to the KKK or to NAMBLA?

    0|1
    0|0
    • Are you comparing homosexuals to the KKK?

    • Show All
    • You don't know when to let go?

    • @ShaeNielson "If I just let you have it your way will you stop notifying me all the time?"

  • Businesses should have the right to refuse service to anyone. Though they should have the sense to not explain it's because you're gay or post a public policy to that effect.

    1|2
    0|0
  • Yes. Businesses should in fact have the right to refuse service. After all, they are not slaves, and should be able to choose who they do business with.

    You have the freedom to say what you like or live how you like..

    i.kinja-img.com/.../ym19dj0vnm8isuvxicv7.jpg

    If people think you're an asshole and show you the door, or refuse to do business with or for you, that's not a violation of your freedom of speech.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes, they should have that right!

    0|1
    0|0
  • No they shouldn't be able to refuse service to someone based on any of those things however they don't have to make any products just because one of them wants it e. g. a gay wedding cake, if they don't make that product they shouldn't be forced to it's be like vegans forcing a restaurant to make something vegan.

    1|0
    0|0
    • I wasn't aware inanimate objects could have a sexuality.

    • Show All
    • How wrong you are darling. Perhaps time and experience will broaden your mind.

    • @9mfeo how is saying it's a gay wedding cake tasteless, I got nothing against the gays, I think your being a bit sensitive and you will never know how much I FUCKING HATE the, "in time you'll get it" every cunt on this site says that, first off cheers for the patronizing bullshit instead of an actual point, it's a nice way to derail the conversation without saying anything intelligent and still look superior

  • No. When you run a business you fill an economic niche. Refusing service at that point is actively taking from another person. If the only haircut place in a small town does this then some people are out a haircut. This would also mean that the echoes effect the rest of their life from job interview to dating. That aside, it's morally disgusting.

    0|0
    0|0
  • In the examples of Christian bakeries (Muslim bakeries do this too but that rarely gets a mention) refusing to bake gay wedding cakes, they're not refusing to serve the people because they're gay, they're refusing to offer a specific service that goes against their religion. Most businesses have specific services they offer and services they refuse to offer. They have every right to do so.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I think businesses do have a right to deny service, because the government doesn't have any policy about discrimination in reference to private deals.

    No doubt it's a dumb move to alienate customers, but I can't see a legitimate argument for requiring people to offer service. If you're saying business can never turn down customers, then your regulating how they conduct their operations, it'd be like telling Chick-Fil-A they can't be closed Sunday because you want waffle fries and their religion isn't a good enough basis to close their stores.

    I can see why people say businesses shouldn't be able to pick and chose customers, but I don't see why they don't have a right to.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They could just close the store and not serve anyone. How would you enforce that?

    2|1
    0|0
    • To me, it's a liberty thing. A business owner who builds the business, works his ass off, helps the community by giving jobs and goods/services, pays taxes etc should be able to decide what they want in their store. It's like you shouldn't be forced to allow a person in your home, right? I felt my business was another home. It's a very personal space that you know intimately and spend many, many hours in. Don't go down that road. There's enough bureaucratic bull shit. Besides, if they require business owners to allow anyone in, there's a million ways around it. It's not enforceable.

  • They do or should be. Until they have the "I don't serve (insert race or gender here)".

    Maybe they should put a huge sign saying they don't serve black people, or women, or men or gay or Asian or middle Easterners or atheists.

    0|0
    0|0
  • More from Guys
    46
Loading...