It's about consistency. If they can ban conservatives then there shouldn't be any complaining when someone else bans a progressive and their status as a protected class shouldn't matter.
What do you mean 'status as a protected class'? That's not a thing. Like for example you realize 'being black' is not a protected class and that all Americans have identical protections against discrimination based on race, right?
Every private business can discriminate against someone based on their conduct because conduct is not protected under public accommodation laws. If any business wants to kick someone out for acting shitty that's their choice. Same thing if Twitter tomorrow wants to ban all conservatives. If some other company wanted to ban all progressives they are free to do so as well! After all we should always judge people on what they DO, not what they were born as. It's an affirmatively positive thing!
That's why this whole thing is a pointless exercise anyway, once folks who are inclined to discriminate figure out the "legally correct" way to discriminate they'll just switch to doing that and presumably with the blessing of folks like
@fskimospy You just need to wrap your bigotry in a plausible sounding excuse about how what you "really" object to (*cough cough*) is the content you're being asked to express and not that you're gay/black/whatever. Or they'll just conveniently "be on vacation that day" or any one of a thousand other reasons.
Like I said before (and like you had no answer to), this strategy of yours relies on the courts being staffed entirely with morons who can't tell the difference. You realize that everyone who loses these judgments does exactly what you suggest, tries to come up with an innocent excuse. Sometimes it works, but a lot of the time it doesn't.
It's not about stopping discrimination in any practical sense, it's just about forcing those who would discriminate to lie about why they're discriminating. I'd much prefer to just have the discrimination out in the open rather than be exercised in stealth mode where you have less recourse to fight it.
Yes, because we all know public accommodation laws were totally ineffective in combating segregation in public businesses in the south. Wait what.
Again I have to ask why you seem to have such strong opinions about an issue you clearly know absolutely nothing about. I'm not even talking about how we disagree but you seem to have a large number of basic facts wrong. For example you thought that the complainant was the one that had to shoulder the legal burden of bringing a case when it is in fact the state. You thought people could get around it by refusing service to someone's parents instead of the child. You appear to think some people are part of 'protected classes' instead of understanding those 'classes' are attributes that all humans share.