Originally Posted by The Unfan

I already agreed that the government has to treat everyone equally. However, that doesn't the people should have to.

Right, and this is what I referring to that I disagree with. It shouldn't be regulated in the way that it is. As long as the business itself isn't harming a non-consenting party the government shouldn't try to shut it down. By refusing service (based on any grounds) they're not actually causing damage, they're just refusing to help.

Also, my analogy of home still applies. It should be up to the owner of the business/building (if rented) to say if you can or can't smoke there. Not the government. The government shouldn't control what you can and can't permit on your property outside of illegal conduct. I'm also a firm believer that smoking should be legal.

As far as regulation, I totally agree with regulating businesses. The government should prevent all companies from doing unwanted harm to people and should monitor money for tax purposes. However, I do think businesses are currently over regulated. Besides, being regulated by and being ran by are two different things. If your tax payer dollars paid for Joe's Sloppy Pizzaria to exist than I would agree that Joe has to treat everyone the same. However, since your tax payer dollars don't pay for Joe's Sloppy Pizzaria than Joe should have the right to tell you to get off of his property for being a ****.