“这是我的营业场所”:在愤怒的时代,蛋糕店与咖啡馆如何继续成为矛盾爆发的中心
"This Is My Place Of Business": How Cakes And Coffee Continue To Be Groundzero In An Age Of Rage

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/my-place-business-how-cakes-and-coffee-continue-be-groundzero-age-rage

法律学者乔纳森·特利(Jonathan Turley)认为,近期发生的几起商业主因政治或宗教观点拒绝提供服务的争议事件,凸显了言论自由方面存在的双重标准。 他列举了一些实例,例如爱达荷州一家咖啡店老板将支持生命权的青少年赶出店外,以及弗吉尼亚州一家沙龙店主拒绝为一名以色列顾客提供服务。特利认为,尽管这些行为可能较为极端或属于糟糕的经营策略,但它们都处于最高法院通过《303创意公司诉埃勒尼斯案》(303 Creative v. Elenis)所确立的言论自由权利范畴之内。 特利指出,许多曾经批评保守派店主拒绝为同性婚礼提供定制服务的人,如今却赞赏自由派店主基于政治或意识形态分歧排斥顾客的权利。他强调,这种排斥权带有风险,且法律层面往往很复杂,尤其是当政治观点与国籍等受保护类别重叠时。最终,特利主张保持意识形态的一致性,断言左翼人士不能在反对某一群体言论自由权利的同时,又为另一群体的同类权利喝彩。他总结道,无论店主持何种政治立场,社会都必须将这些权利视为一项中立原则予以接受。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Jonathan Turley via Jonathan Turley,

"This is my place of business."

Those words from Jim Sheehan, owner of the Wydaho Roasters coffee shop in Driggs, Idaho, have sparked the latest controversy over the right of businesses to refuse service on the basis of religious or political views.

Sheehan has drawn national attention after throwing out a group of pro-life teenagers, calling them the equivalent of a Ku Klux Klan meeting in his shop. Sheehan clearly caters to those who want their lattes with an added shot of rage.

However, this and a number of other cases have exposed the hypocrisy of many regarding the service businesses must provide customers with opposing views. From cakes to coffee, shops remain ground zero for an age of rage.

Years ago, politicians and pundits rallied around the effort to force Jack Phillips, a cakeshop owner, to create cakes celebrating same-sex marriages. Phillips objected that it violated his religious beliefs. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court in what many of us hoped would be a final resolution of this conflict.

I had long criticized the framing of the case (and other similar cases) under the religious clauses rather than treating it as a simple matter of free speech. In the end, the Supreme Court punted in a frustrating 2018 decision.

In 2023, however, the Supreme Court delivered a major victory for free speech in 303 Creative v. Elenis. It ruled that Lorie Smith, a Christian website designer, could refuse to provide services for a same-sex marriage. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that "the framers designed the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to protect the 'freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think.' ... They did so because they saw the freedom of speech 'both as an end and as a means.'"

But notably, in cases like Masterpiece Cakeshop, Phillips insisted that he would always sell cakes to any couple, including same-sex couples. He only refused to make cakes specifically celebrating same-sex marriages, due to his religious views.

The case of Wydaho is different. Sheehan refused the same general accommodation offered to all customers because he opposes pro-life causes. In the confrontation, Sheehan declared that "in my world" pro-lifers are no different from the Ku Klux Klan.

"This is my place of business," he declared. "I did a lot of work to get people on the ballot so women would have the right to choose in the state of Idaho, and this is something I do not support, nor does my wife, and it's our business. So we have that choice."

In my view, they do have that choice. Yet it must also be acknowledged what Sheehan is doing is far more extreme than what Phillips did in Masterpiece Cakeshop. He is not being asked to create a coffee concoction opposing abortion, like a Cafe Au Life specialty drink. He acknowledges that other groups might use the shop - he just does not want these teenagers to use it to support pro-life causes.

The same controversy arose the same week across the country in Virginia. In Alexandria, Fatana Karimi, owner of the Karimi Salon, threw out a woman after she revealed that she was Israeli. Jessica Walton posted an account of the encounter, and a video was later posted on social media.

In the video, the person identified as Karimi says that she declared on Instagram that she would not serve those who support Israel. (She also adds that she got Walton to sign a release for the video.)

The Virginia Human Rights Act states that businesses cannot engage in "unlawful discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or military status." Karimi will likely argue she refused service not due to Walton's religion or national origin, but due to her support for Israel - a political position.

The case is reminiscent of the abusive treatment afforded to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz at Martha's Vineyard by a pierogi stand. He was also refused service over his political views.

The line between national origin and religious discrimination versus political discrimination can be tenuous and unclear. However, in the video, the owner states that it is her national identity that is causing the action: "Get out of my shop. I can't provide service to an Israeli. It's against my political beliefs. You need to leave immediately."

Back in Idaho, Sheehan's bizarre analogy to the KKK outraged many, to the point that he later apologized for it. However, it is fascinating that liberals are now celebrating the right to exclude others for political or religious reasons, even when they are not asked to engage in any expressive act or make any creative product that contravenes their beliefs.

If that is now the case, many owe individuals such as Phillips an apology for years of costly lawsuits, even after the Supreme Court gave him his first nominal victory.

Sheehan could be prosecuted if he were refusing general service or accommodations to the teenagers due to their race or religion. But he is refusing service on the basis of his own political views. Wydaho Roasters does not appear to want business from people who are pro-life, of whom there might be quite a few in Idaho. Karimi appears not to want either Israeli or possibly Jewish customers. It is a curious business plan to exclude such a large segment of the market, but some owners are sure to put their political views before their profits.

However, those on the left cannot have it both ways. They cannot reject the free speech rights of some owners to decline service while celebrating others' refusal to do the same thing. None of this is likely to make society any more civil. No one wants a black eye to go with the red-eye espresso.

Of course, recognizing the free speech rights of an unhinged coffee shop owner does not require patronizing his establishment. Sheehan clearly does not want to serve pro-life citizens, and I expect the feeling is mutual.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of "Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution." He is a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com