>It even means a restaurant should be able to refuse to seat (pick one): black people, white people, males, redheads, left-handed people or introverts. That is

>It even means a restaurant should be able to refuse to seat (pick one): black people, white people, males, redheads, left-handed people or introverts. That is an odd position for a man in a mixed-race marriage with a mixed-race child to take, because not too long ago it would have meant his child might not be served or seated. It's only because our government took steps to end discrimination (after being forced to do so by the people) that it's safe to hold such unenlightened opinions. I wonder if he'll ever explain to his own child that it's OK they were discriminated against because "corporate Darwinism". One can and should be able to discriminate all day long on the basis of ideas or actions, which is what has happened with Anglin and his crew of a-holes (sort of - I suspect it's more ass-covering than principle in a lot of cases). But, discrimination should not happen based on something an individual cannot change, which is what the OP seems to be OK with.