But this post reeks of bigotry.
Actually it doesn't. The recognition of the right of free association and property regarding goods, services, and labor of the individual is not bigotry because everyone would have those rights, not only a select few.
The Arizona law, which is the topic of this thread, could be viewed as bigotry. It would have provided special rights only to those who claim religion as the foundation for their business decisions. However someone else who makes the exact same decision but doesn't mouth the magic phrase "I did it because of my sincerely held religious belief" is not afforded the same protection that this law applies.
Let me give you a couple of examples. I spent 20-years in the military risking my life multiple times and participated in a war (Desert Shield/Desert Storm) where I have combat flight time for missions flown in theater, I did it because I believe in liberty and freedom and felt a responsibility to serve my country. As you can guess I'm a pretty patriotic guy. However I oppose legislation to make flag burning a criminal act, on the other hand I will bad mouth those who actually burn a flag as low life scum sucking turds. Even though I disagree with their speech, I will defend their right to have it. Same goes for the wacka-doodles at Westboro Baptist Church, I disagree with their message about homosexuals, but I would stand against a law making their speech illegal.
Same applies to this situation. To defend the rights of private business owners to free association and the ability to manage their property, goods, and labor in accordance with the model that they desire does not support bigotry, it supports freedom, liberty, and individual self-determination. I think a florist that turns away an interracial couple BECAUSE they are an interracial couple are unmitigated jerks - but that is their bigotry not mine. I think a photographer that turns away a lesbian couple for a commitment ceremony (Elane Photography, New Mexico) BECAUSE they are a lesbian couple are schmucks - but that is their bigotry not mine.
I opposed this law because it grants "special rights" to discriminate, no such "special right" should be needed - Public Accommodation laws applied to private business should be repeal - IMHO. That is not condoning discrimination, when such discrimination occurs the light of truth should be shined strongly on it and pubic reaction should let the business owners know that conduct is unacceptable through lawful means such as information sources such as newspapers, the internet, web sites, and customer reviews. Some call that harsh, but Focus on the Family had no problem calling for boycotts of companies they considered "gay friendly" and what good for the goose is good for the gander. Ask Sweetcakes by Melissa how well their business did once their discrimination because known to the public. IIRC business dropped by 60% and they closed their storefront.
>>>>