Huffington Post reports:
"On Tuesday, Governor Susana Martinez (R-N.M.) lost a hairstylist who refused to clip her locks out of disgust with her opposition to marriage equality. Antonio Darden, who had cut Martinez's hair on three occasions and runs Antonio's Hair Studio in Santa Fe, N.M., re-crafted the notion of civil disobedience when he declined to accept an appointment."
To all the people cheering on Darden, do you believe defendants getting sued for refusing services to gender-segregated couples should get the same “civil disobedience” pass?
Or do you believe in double standards?
What about lawsuit equality? Should Martinez sue?
The two examples you gave are:
ReplyDelete1). A site, OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, receiving tax-breaks as a result, refusing to host a civil union (which is not contrary to Christianity since it is not marriage), and then getting slapped down saying it doesn't get to pick and choose which members of the public it caters to, and
2). A bed-and-breakfast in Vermont (public accommodations) refusing to host a civil union and getting sued (see: Heart of Atlanta Motel vs. United States), which says public accommodations cannot discriminate against customers.
On a side note, "gender-segregated couples" is a very Orwellian-way of trying to control the language in the debate. Fortunately you're the only person I know to use the term.
Everyone is entitled to have their own opinions. As long as there is no formal contract between them, she could just let her go and find a new hairstylist. hair cutting classes
ReplyDelete