Religious discrimination by commercial business

[Rob Weinberg]

At 03:31 PM 8/26/98 -0500, Rick Duncan wrote:
>Marie Failinger talks about "legally enforcing" the value of
>"tolerance." The problem is that to enforce "tolerance" is necessarily
>to act intolerantly in a particularly forceful way. When Mrs. Smith was
>punished for her "intolerance" (i.e. for refusing to sin against
>God by facilitating cohabitation) the state of California was not
>enforcing tolerance it was acting intolerantly. In effect, California
>told Mrs. Smith "we don't want people like you trying to make a living
>in the housing market here in California. If you insist on living by
>Christian ethics (as you understand them) you will need to get out of
>business in this state (or better yet, why not move out of the state
>altogether)."
>
>This is not an issue of religious freedom vs. tolerance. The value of
>tolerance can be seen as *supporting* Mrs. Smith's claim to be left
>alone to manage *her* property in accordance with her conscience and
>identity. It is the cohabitants who are trying to make an outlaw out
>of Mrs. Smith, not the other way around.

I agree with Eugene's re-articulation of the issue, and that
tolerant/intolerant labels ought not to be relevant, because of their
tendencies to confuse. But a question to Rick in clarification of *his*
definition of "tolerance": Rick, aren't you saying that if the law were
truly "tolerant" in the Mrs. Smith scenario it would *permit* her to
discriminate on the basis of religion (hers or prospective tenants) in her
commercial transactions? And that therefore, discrimination ought to be
legal if there is a relgious or religion basis to it?

And if it is therefore legal to permit someone to discriminate on the basis
of religion "in accordance with her conscience and identity," does not the
law then have an affirmative duty to *protect* her right to discriminate
against (or in favor) of others on the basis of religion?

Why then would anti-discrimination laws in general not be eviscerated
whenever anyone claims a religious basis for their discriminatory
decisions? Or is that truly an acceptable loss when protecting the right to
discriminate on the basis of religion?
******************
Rob Weinberg, Montgomery, AL
http://www.mindspring.com/~robertmw/