Missouri joins the crazy train

[AggregateDemand]

I understand what Wallingford is trying to do, but he's going about it the wrong way. Let the courts decide when specific performance is the proper remedy.

Overall, this isn't a detestable legislative pursuit. Imagine a gay-bashing Christian fundamentalist wanted his daughter to have special wedding dress designed by her favorite designer. The dress designer is gay and refuses to design a dress for a Christian fundamentalist.

Are you really going to force a gay designer to use his talents to further the happiness of someone who offends him? If so, you're part of the problem. Wallingford actually believes they should have the right to refuse.

[AggregateDemand]

Yes. The rights of the people matter more than the rights of businesses.

People and business are the same. We only separate them for legislative convenience.

[AggregateDemand]

You don't notice any differences? Not very observant.

I know that people invented commerce and business organizations. The ambitions of businesses are always dictated by people.

I understand that business was created to pursue profit, whereas the individual pursues a more complicated metric (utility), but pretending that business is not entitled to certain protections is likely cleaving off the parts of humanity you find to be inconvenient.

Have you ever demanded that your employer pay your less money? Didn't think so. You are business. You can't run from it.

[AggregateDemand]

The separation of people and businesses is what enables businesses to start easier and removes personal liability from the equation

No kidding. Maybe that's why I said we separate them for convenience.