4 ms·

It's worth noting that the US Supreme Court upheld the right of those bakers to not serve cake at a gay wedding, 7-2. Title VII protections tend to be applied

It's worth noting that the US Supreme Court upheld the right of those bakers to not serve cake at a gay wedding, 7-2. Title VII protections tend to be applied to housing and employment discrimination, not restricting the general right of business owners to freedom of association with respect to who they'll take on as customers.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago
They didn’t rule on freedom of association. They ruled that the commission demonstrated anti-religious bias. It was a very narrow ruling for this particular case, and not on the larger question.
- nonameiguess 5y ago
  That is true, and frankly it seemed pretty cowardly on the part of the court to do that. Nonetheless, I can't think of much in the way of contrary rulings short of forced desegregation, which was a pretty special case because black customers weren't just being denied service by one provider, but systematically by all providers in an entire multi-state region of the country. Most shops come with a sign posted saying they can refuse to serve you for any reason whatsoever, including total personal whim, and that doesn't get challenged.
  - gjsman-1000 5y ago
    Remember that the baker in that case wasn't even refusing to sell them a cake. The couple could choose any cake in the shop, and the baker was willing to make them a cake for almost any occasion - he just objected to making a customized cake specifically for a gay wedding, kind of like if you were a baker and didn't want to make a cake for the American Nazi Party or the KKK or the pro-lifers next door or the Mayor you oppose. If they wanted a generic cake and wanted to buy icing to decorate it themselves, he was still willing to sell them one.
    - nonameiguess 5y ago
      Sure, and as far as I can tell, that is basically the position of GoDaddy as well. I just banged away at the whois database and they appear to be the registrar for prolifeacrossamerica.org, for instance. It's perfectly okay to be anti-abortion and do business with GoDaddy. It's just not okay to host a dox registry exposing the HIPAA-protected information of your neighbors.
    - MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
      That's a very interesting distinction that I didn't know about. I feel like reddit has intentionally left that part out because it shows the person was of reasonable mind. It was just something about it in particular they were not willing to cross.
  - zdragnar 5y ago
    Typically you'll only see those signs on establishments that serve alcohol, and that is just a CYA. Any group who can demonstrate that they were refused service due to being a protected class (such as a bar that refuses to serve alcohol to disabled people, as an arbitrary example) will still be acting illegally and likely face prosecution.
    - nonameiguess 5y ago
      They actually do pretty easily find ways around that. My dad used to play in traveling sports teams when I was a kid and hated going to the midwest. All the bars were organized as "private clubs" where the rule was you needed a member to vouch for you before they'd let you in. Somehow, random strangers at the bars would magically vouch for all of his white teammates but not for him.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago

They didn’t rule on freedom of association. They ruled that the commission demonstrated anti-religious bias. It was a very narrow ruling for this particular case, and not on the larger question.

nonameiguess 5y ago
That is true, and frankly it seemed pretty cowardly on the part of the court to do that. Nonetheless, I can't think of much in the way of contrary rulings short of forced desegregation, which was a pretty special case because black customers weren't just being denied service by one provider, but systematically by all providers in an entire multi-state region of the country. Most shops come with a sign posted saying they can refuse to serve you for any reason whatsoever, including total personal whim, and that doesn't get challenged.
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  Remember that the baker in that case wasn't even refusing to sell them a cake. The couple could choose any cake in the shop, and the baker was willing to make them a cake for almost any occasion - he just objected to making a customized cake specifically for a gay wedding, kind of like if you were a baker and didn't want to make a cake for the American Nazi Party or the KKK or the pro-lifers next door or the Mayor you oppose. If they wanted a generic cake and wanted to buy icing to decorate it themselves, he was still willing to sell them one.
  - nonameiguess 5y ago
    Sure, and as far as I can tell, that is basically the position of GoDaddy as well. I just banged away at the whois database and they appear to be the registrar for prolifeacrossamerica.org, for instance. It's perfectly okay to be anti-abortion and do business with GoDaddy. It's just not okay to host a dox registry exposing the HIPAA-protected information of your neighbors.
  - MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
    That's a very interesting distinction that I didn't know about. I feel like reddit has intentionally left that part out because it shows the person was of reasonable mind. It was just something about it in particular they were not willing to cross.
- zdragnar 5y ago
  Typically you'll only see those signs on establishments that serve alcohol, and that is just a CYA. Any group who can demonstrate that they were refused service due to being a protected class (such as a bar that refuses to serve alcohol to disabled people, as an arbitrary example) will still be acting illegally and likely face prosecution.
  - nonameiguess 5y ago
    They actually do pretty easily find ways around that. My dad used to play in traveling sports teams when I was a kid and hated going to the midwest. All the bars were organized as "private clubs" where the rule was you needed a member to vouch for you before they'd let you in. Somehow, random strangers at the bars would magically vouch for all of his white teammates but not for him.