We passed laws in the 60s that made it a crime NOT to serve people if they were black. Some people opposed that idea, but it has a huge level of support.
Oregon passed a law pretty much identical, only specifying GLBT. If we can pass a law requiring a bar to serve blacks, Oregon can pass a law requiring a bar to serve men who are wearing dresses, or women wearing pants.
And if the bar owner doesn’t like it, he can either spend his money getting people elected who won’t pass these laws, or he can spend his money to move to a state where they have not passed these laws.
But in the end, a place that does nothing more for customers than serve them should expect they can’t tell some people they won’t serve them. This is different than a “for-hire” service where a person contracts with you — and you should be allowed to choose your clientelle.
I think it was a shame we couldn’t solve the problem of blacks being served by convincing people to stop being racist, rather than forcing them by law to stop being racist. But that’s where we are.
If individuals are doing things that cost the bar money or patrons, they should be able to be dealt with as individuals based on what they are doing, rather than what they are. “After repeated requests, your group continues to act in an uncivil manner in our restrooms, so I regret that I will have to ask you to no longer frequent my establishment, for a period of 3 months. After that time, I will consider allowing you back, so long as you are willing to comport yourselves in an appropriate manner while using my establishment.”
“But in the end, a place that does nothing more for customers than serve them should expect they can’t tell some people they won’t serve them.”
Buncombe.