You and Beatty together got me thinking this is one of those situations where the law can speak to criminal behavior—discrimination, say—but not so effectively to more clearly moral things, like what you think and feel. There’s no law requiring Americans to be empathetic or broadminded, and it would be fairly pointless to enact one. I still think choosing to keep a particular business out of your airport because they’ve demonstrated an antipathy to a segment of society based on sexual orientation is more of a social judgment than a governmental, legal one. To me they’re not saying it’s somehow illegal simply to be hateful as much as they’re saying that in weighing the various factors yea or nay that stuff counts against Chick-fil-A. A private agency or independent authority might make a similar decision. It’s an interesting question, at any rate.
2 Likes
I still think choosing to keep a particular business out of your airport because they’ve demonstrated an antipathy to a segment of society based on sexual orientation is more of a social judgment than a governmental, legal one.
how about a monetary one? i think an airport has a fiduciary responsibility to choose the tenants who will be most profitable and best serve travelers. if a chain has estranged a segment of the population and those that sympathize with them then they must do what’s best for the facility and the people who use it.
2 Likes
Why would the city council agree to provide such an advantageous business location to a company steeped in hate? Delarosa seems to think rightwing haters add to diversity??? WTF?