• HunterBidensLapDog@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Now that #SupremeCourt says we can discriminate, I’m trying to figure out what to tag content. #NoMAGA #NoRepublicans #QueerOnly #NoBreeders #NoChristians

    • PizzasDontWearCapes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      My understanding is that businesses can refuse services which conflict with their beliefs, morals, etc, not broadly refuse to serve people

      So you can’t refuse someone for being a MAGA clown, but you could refuse to print MAGA shirts for a customer

      • I feel like this whole thing is simply just a clarification on what was already the case. Like, a baker can’t just refuse a gay person for being gay. But they could refuse to make that gay person a huge dick shaped cake because, presumably, they would also refuse to make a huge dick shaped cake for a straight woman as well. The reason the customer wants the dick cake is irrelevant; merely that the cake is a dick.

        • PizzasDontWearCapes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s close to that but not quite - a dick cake is a dick cake, but a wedding cake with a man and woman couple vs. a wedding cake with a man and man couple is treated differently

          So, this is treating representing gay marriage as if it is unethical and vulgar which is clearly discriminatory

          The law still doesn’t permit the shop owner to blanket refuse service to someone who is gay (or MAGA), but fully allows them to descriminate against gay people exercising the same freedoms non-gays have, like getting married