In an economic system based upon free enterprise, it is assumed that a business owner should have the right to serve or not serve customers as he or she sees fit. After all, if they were to refuse to serve a certain segment of the population, and the rest of the population found that offensive, then they would not patronize the establishment. If the rest of the population was not offended, they would continue to go to the business; this is the free enterprise system at work.
Unless, of course, one is of the liberal, progressive mindset. A Knoxville, Tennessee, restaurant refused to serve a sitting State Senator, Stacey Campfield, because of his positions about gays. Martha Boggs, the owner of the restaurant, said she asked Campfield to leave, calling him "stupid and dangerous." She then posted a sign in the front of her business that said she wouldn't be serving Campfield. This action is certainly within her rights as a business owner.
But then if one lives in New Hampshire, the state legislature has proposed a bill allowing certain businesses to refuse serving certain groups of customers. The bill would allow florists, caterers, and other wedding-related businesses from serving gay couples if their religious beliefs are against same-sex marriages. This has created an outcry from the left, claiming this would lead to discrimination.
Isn't this a case of double standards by the left? In the first case, it is okay to keep people out of your business; in the second, it's not. Evidently as long as the business owner agrees with whatever the left's position is, they can do what they please, but as soon as they disagree, they are ostracized.
Business owners have the right to serve only those they wish to serve in their businesses; this doesn't necessarily make it right, but they do have that right, just as customers have the right to not shop at a business which they feel is being discriminatory. When enough people, offended by such discriminatory policies, stop patronizing the business, the business will either have to end the policy or close the doors
The scary part of this whole thing is that the New Hampshire state legislature would even have to consider such a bill in the first place.