This story is unavailable.

I brought up the wheelchair ramp to demonstrate that discrimination can happen in the absence of patronage. That said, I would argue that the sign telling someone that their money will go to a group that hates them, should they choose to shop there, is every bit the barrier to entry that a physical barrier is. The person in the wheelchair would have to risk injury crawling up the steps to engage the service. The gay customer would have to risk injury (via a FRC donation) to engage the same service offered to everyone else without that condition. To your point about providing services alone satisfying the law, I strongly disagree. Services must be provided without consideration to sexual orientation. Telling only your gay customers, “I am going to use the proceeds from this transaction to attempt to harm you, should you choose to do business with me.” is clearly the opposite of that. There has to be a court case somewhere that addresses this. I’ll look when I have some time.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.