Forgiveness_Man wrote:

thepossiblepolice wrote:

You're right, it's about whether businesses should have the right to discriminate against a person based on the way they feed their child.

The same way a business should have the right to not allow a woman in a burka into their business? The same way a business should be allowed to not allow gay and lesbian couples to have PDA's in their business? The same way they should be allowed to not allow interracial couples to have PDA's in their business? Those are all activities that it's not PC to discriminate against that are choices a person makes based on being part of a protected group; a certain religion, gay or lesbian, or race. It may not be illegal to be racist, homophobic or xenophobic, but that doesn't make it OK. Nursing women are legally protected, people can not like it, but they still are.

If a business allows children and bottle feeding, then banning breastfeeding is discriminatory against breastfeeding women.

If a business should always have a moral right to discriminate for whatever reason they want, or a legal right to the same, then I will agree that it should be within their rights to discriminate against breastfeeding women as well.

This is about the merits of said protection. The law protects a lot of things it probably shouldn't. A business shouldn't be forced to tolerate anything in it's own property that it doesn't want to. I am sure you wouldn't like the government telling you gotta allow guests in your house to do something you didn't like just because it had benefits.

Businesses have a right to expect certain behavior to be followed in their establishments. The law trying to tell them otherwise is merely a symptom of a greater problem.

A business open to the public is totally different than a private home.



Businesses do have the right to expect certain behavior, they can set rules and ask people to leave if the don't follow them. Some rules are more acceptable than others though. For instance, if they want to ban same sex couples from kissing in their place of business, IMO they need to make the rule "No Kissing" not "No Same Sex Kissing".

That's just my OPINION though, not the law. TBH I'm not sure what the law is in regard to private businesses but the OP's question wasn't about what the law is, it's about what it should be and my opinion is that businesses should not be allowed to discriminate. If they want to ban babies, ban children, ban any kind of food or drink including baby bottles and breastfeeding...Fine. Singling out any one group is wrong though, IMO.

thepossiblepolice wrote:

Forgiveness_Man wrote:

This is about the merits of said protection. The law protects a lot of things it probably shouldn't. A business shouldn't be forced to tolerate anything in it's own property that it doesn't want to. I am sure you wouldn't like the government telling you gotta allow guests in your house to do something you didn't like just because it had benefits.

Businesses have a right to expect certain behavior to be followed in their establishments. The law trying to tell them otherwise is merely a symptom of a greater problem.

A business open to the public is totally different than a private home.



Businesses do have the right to expect certain behavior, they can set rules and ask people to leave if the don't follow them. Some rules are more acceptable than others though. For instance, if they want to ban same sex couples from kissing in their place of business, IMO they need to make the rule "No Kissing" not "No Same Sex Kissing".

That's just my OPINION though, not the law. TBH I'm not sure what the law is in regard to private businesses but the OP's question wasn't about what the law is, it's about what it should be and my opinion is that businesses should not be allowed to discriminate. If they want to ban babies, ban children, ban any kind of food or drink including baby bottles and breastfeeding...Fine. Singling out any one group is wrong though, IMO.

I don't think it is.

Some rules may be more acceptable than others but that is always the case. And okay, a "no kissing" rule then.

And IMO, right or wrong, a business has the right to say what goes on under it's roof.