task0778
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #41
“Where's the harm if they go to another bakery down the street (there is one)?”
The harm manifest in that such discriminatory practices are disruptive to the local markets and all other interrelated markets.
The Commerce Clause affords state and local governments the authority to regulate markets to ensure their stability (see, Wickard v. Filburn (1942), Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. US (1964), Gonzales v. Raich (2005)).
Allowing businesses open to the general public to refuse to accommodate patrons solely because of the patrons’ race, religion, or sexual orientation is clearly disruptive to a local market, threatens the stability of that market, and warrants states and local jurisdictions to regulate against such disruption.
I do not believe that one baker's refusal to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple will be that disruptive to the Denver economy. What nonsense. It'd be different if everybody was doing it, like it used to be in the south when racial discrimination was rampant. But that ain't the case here, it's only one baker and he's willing to offer any of his other products other than wedding cake for same-sex marriage. Somehow I'm not seeing stability being threatened in the marketplace.
Last edited: