janus : I don't see the problem, unless that person is being disruptive, like shouting derogatory terms at the black baker or the neo nazi is walking around with a swastika tattoo in plain sight it's another thing, and that's generally something that would count as discrimination and being disruptive and people are well within their right to refuse service in those cases.

Generally speaking though that would probably be likely to be an isolated incident, you're usually not able to tell the beliefs of a person just by looking at them.

Society influences children but also adults, like how we have this fixation on women having to loose weight and being as slim as possible in the western world, the commercials we watch, the newspapers we read basically everything affects us. Having stores with signs saying "-insert specific group- are not allowed" is something that would probably sway society to become generally less accepting of said group.

"Discrimination" can be vague when it comes to this discussion.

I think all people should have the right to be served be any private business that is actually registered as a business. That being said, here comes weird situations. Like say a man goes to a woman's only gym... shouldn't the business be allowed to refuse him admittance?

It's a weird situation, and I would say the best idea would be to have businesses have to receive permission to forbid a certain group of people before doing so. It could be a simple and easily obtain permission by the government; they would simply have to give good reason why they choose to ban a certain group of people.

For those who say "but it's THEIR business, they can choose" I certainly understand. But I think if you a registered as a business in a country that claims to be free, that country should have the right to expect all it's businesses to adhere to a certain level of respect for all people.

Light Knight : Why would they need a permission to do that in the first place? It is the total opposite of freedom. Using that non-discrimination logic means that gentlemen's clubs would have to hire male... performers.

Zlinqx : even if these were isolated incidents they would still be discrimination if they were not rowdy according to your definition.

Also, seeing those signs might indeed influence children, but with time and education everything can change. It was not 60 years ago that Jim Crow laws were definitely abolished...

janus : I'm not talking specifically hiring someone. I was referring to being a customer at a location. I don't believe a business should generally be allowed to refuse to serve certain people unless prior approval is granted. An example being a woman's only gym, there is a good reason to restricted a gym to only woman, so they could have the right to do so.

As to why it's not oppression of freedom in my opinion. I think a business is something open to the public that has to be approve to an extent by the government (you have to register as a business), and so the government has the duty to regulated it to an extent. For example, you need have a washroom for certain types of businesses, some require fire alarms, you need a license to serve alcohol, etc. I don't think it's unreasonable that the government can also demand a business serve all people equally, as long as there isn't a good reason not to.