This is good news.
Business concerns that discriminate against classes of customers lose business.
But, it is basic freedom of association for business owners to be able to pick and choose customers.
We need the Supreme Court to reaffirm that basic human right.
In the case at hand the business owner was free to choose his employees, and he chose not to retain one who refused service to a customer. It's win-win-win. The business owner gets to keep his customer, the now-former employee gets to exhibit his cheap moral posturing, and the customer gets to enjoy the meal best served cold.
But, it is basic freedom of association for business owners to be able to pick and choose customers.
Agree, but it is the BUSINESS OWNERS right to decide, not an employee. The employees of the Red Hen at least called the owner to make the decision. She did, and now her business will pay the price. But I support the owner’s right to do business with whom they wish without the government getting involved.
The owner of the restaurant has the Right to trade his property, as he desires, other individuals have to only desire to trade their property with him. If the restaurant owner is a jerk, no one can be forced under the law to trade with him, and it goes both ways.
“But, it is basic freedom of association for business owners to be able to pick and choose customers.”
Does that work both ways? What about the freedom of association for customers to pick and choose business owners?
Sure, customers can choose to go to a more acceptable business if one is available, but what if the owner of the only gas station within an hour’s drive wants to retire and sell? Can the customers choose the new owner?
If Bloomberg wanted to buy it and make it a “gun free zone” when all the customers are against that, could they stop him from becoming the owner?