Hacker News Reader

Comment by wl | Hacker News Reader

I think you have to look at what motivated laws like this. In one famous example in Arizona, an anti-discrimination law penalized a wedding photographer who refused to work a same-sex wedding. It's not that people want the right to not serve gay people at Chick-fil-a.

View on HN

yes, there are people that want to the right to not serve gay people at chik-fil-a.

Substitute the word 'same-sex' with 'black' in that famous example you mention and it should become obvious why laws like that are needed (and were needed 50 years ago).

A wedding photographer photographs weddings, eh? It is quite sensible for said photographer to turn down requests for photographing non-weddings, and holds to a certain widespread classic & religious definition of what a wedding is. Now many find a reason to press for legislation [re]stating that it's the proprietor who gets to decide what the definition s/he adheres to on common religious grounds, not what others say it is.

"It is quite sensible for said photographer to turn down requests for photographing non-weddings, and holds to a certain widespread classic & religious definition of what a wedding is."

And now you've discriminated and are subject to lawsuits. As has already happened in a number of cases.

People used to not think marriages between people of different skin colors weren't actual weddings either. Do you think that a Catholic photographer would agree to work a Lutheran wedding?

Just sayin...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com