It's not silly since it's still slavery. If a child doesn't understand that there is different forms of slavery that is there problem. This form just so happens to be listed in the amendment itself.I don't necessarily disagree with the concept, but trying to shroud it in the mantel of "unconstitutionally" just makes our position sound silly. A child recognizes the difference between slavery where one person own the other as property and a business who voluntarily offers services to the public being limited on the ability to discriminate.
I don't believe the Constitution supports that case. I realize the SC disagrees with me, but I find that they are being extremely dishonest with their arguments.We agree on the fundamental concept, Pubic Accommodation laws are wrong - that doesnt' mean that they are illegal. Just because the government has the power to do something (and yes State level Public Accommodation laws are a power held by the States under the 10th Amendment), doesn't mean that we can support the exercising of such power.