It’s all about private contract and free association. It has everything to do with freedom and is the essence of every decision that we make. Whether that decision be as benign as choosing vanilla over chocolate or something that is far more controversial such has not hiring a Jew, an African-American, or homosexual for the simple reason that you don’t like them. One has nothing to do with ethics and the other has everything to do with it. It is not a moral act to discriminate against someone based on their race, creed, or sexual proclivities, but that does not mean that there should be anti-discrimination laws. Some might call discrimination bad behavior; I call it a core element of freedom.

A private employer should be able to make a contract between himself and his employee, which satisfies both. He should be able to cater to whom anyone he wants or fill whatever niche he wants. There was a restaurant owner in 2006, for example, who refused to serve you unless you spoke English. Another example would be establishments which prohibited blacks from entry. An individual has every right to not associate with anyone whom he finds objectionable.

Advocates of anti-discrimination legislation believe that all people have the right to enter someone’s property and business and demand services from them. They believe that they have the right to restrict speech in the workplace. They engage in the fallacious argument, which says, “be tolerant of all except the intolerant” and would use the law to discriminate against those who hold on to controversial ideologies. By using the power of the jail cell, they will coerce a private business man into hiring someone that he doesn’t want to, serve people that he doesn’t want to, or allow people onto his property even if he doesn’t want them to be there. This is as egregious as the act that they rage against.

Strip people of these rights and you strip them of freedom. You don’t have to like it, but you don’t have to associate with people or businesses like that either.

The fact of the matter is, is that you do not have a right to work for me, a right to buy my product, a right to be on my property, or a right to utilize my services, or not be called a “fag” (for example) if I want to call you one. Is that unfair? Yes. But grow up and get over it. That’s the nature of freedom.

The only “business” that is truly obligated to treat you fairly and blindly is the government; federal or local. For brevity’s sake, we will not go into just how big of a failure government has been in this regard.

I don’t want anybody to experience discrimination. But it does happen, and in a free country or state, should be allowed to happen. There are other avenues available to deal with such behaviors or policies rather than through the law or the jail cell. Public opinion could sway against the business and cause it to go out of business or change its policies. Private avenues are far better than statist anti-discrimination laws.

All that being said, who here would dispute that it is illogical and spiteful to discriminate solely based a person’s race, creed, or orientation? That’s just bad business and bad ethics.