- Apr 5, 2010
- 81,836
- 33,352
- 2,300
We had a thread about this farmer and his situation not long ago. He runs an operation at his farm that includes a big banquet room that is sometimes used for weddings, which he advertises for and promotes. The trouble he got in was when he did that advertising and promoting at the farmers market located in a town that had strict laws about discrimination. Hence, even though his farm and banquet operation was outside of the town, his operation at the farmers market drew attention and inclusion of his discriminatory operation under the town's laws as an extension of the business which fell under the jurisdiction of the town.
But considering he doesn't discriminate at all when he's selling things in the town, how can they justify banning him?
They moved from banning for an action to banning for thought, as the action they object to is outside their juristiction.