It really makes you think about what’s “legal” to deny vs what’s practical.
“Oh you supported X, no bank account for you”
Not a legal right but please try to conduct commerce.
Discussion
In the old days it was always legal to deny service. Blacks in America could not stay at hotels because every hotel owner logically thought "most of my customers are white and some of them probably don't want to be around blacks. So I'll make more money if I just stick to whites." This was why protected classes became a thing. But the old ways were that banks could deny you, hotels could deny you, people could openly discriminate for any reason they wanted to, and people knew what they owned by right, and what they were grateful for. Athiests were often discriminated against too.
I find it interesting how many people who have experienced discrimination for the first time in the last 5 or so years via cancel culture or vaccine mandates suddenly argue against it as if they have a right to not be discrimated against, even though many of them took the other side when it wasn't them being discriminated against. I'm not saying you are one of them.
And I take no firm side on the issue of discrimination, but I lean towards allowing it across the board because I lean towards respecting individual freedom. I say that even though I hate cancel culture and think that it is a cultural sickness.
I get what you’re saying.
My only point was that there seems to be a vulnerability with what can be legally denied and how dependent people are on that.
100 years ago you could probably get away with not having a bank account more than now. Never made that a good thing, just a more manageable thing (I’m sure this would be a major hurdle for a business even back then).
If I had a major take away from covid- one of them would be that I would avoid making common cause with discriminatory people while trying to uphold some finer point of freedom.
You seem like a person who tries to go by logic so let me outline a principle I heard that changed my thought process.
It's the concept of negative liberty vs positive liberty. Freedom from vs freedom to.
"Freedom from" is not having some one coerce you. Don't tread on me
"Freedom to" is expanding one's capabilities- for example, no human has a natural ability to fly- but today this is something society works together to provide freedom of movement.
To me the person who discriminates reduces human autonomy by curtailing another person's freedom to.
As you have observed the vast majority of people who engage in such behaviors do not care at all about freedom-its entirely selfish and not in good faith. "Cancel culture" is a "fafo" situation that many people had coming.
if law tell u register you npub n bitcoin addr ?
just like law tells get birth certificate, biometric passport , chip implanted at birth
Q how many abide or comply or revolt or leave
country by country state by state district by district