2539
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Bad example. The cases where businesses could refuse service to a customer were due to religious freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Not liking Trump would not fall under that category. Not sure about the other example though.

In general though, I think this would be fine. As long as this business is not funded or supported by taxpayer money.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"My personal religion requires me to refuse service to Trump supporters." Boom, protected.

These "religious freedoms" cited are completely arbitrarily defined. Anyone can claim they have a religion with tenets that exclude specific groups of people or promote civil rights abuses. Having a religion that says "you must commit crime" does not actually give you the right within society to commit crime.

this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
2539 points (94.2% liked)

Malicious Compliance

19254 readers
3 users here now

People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.

======

======

Also check out the following communities:

[email protected] [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS