Thread by @chadfelixg

I believe that a business should be able to conduct itself legally as it pleases. This includes deciding how it associates itself.

But the law is clear on discrimination.
The issue I have is two fold:

1) The laws are not being enforced equally or fairly.

2) The issue of discrimination has become too overwhelming to simply rely on market forces to correct it. We are witnessing multiple massive corporations in charge of huge swaths of the market act together to target individuals belonging to one group.

That is a problem.

I passionately defending the Masterpiece Cakeshop case because I passionately believe a person should not be forced to act against their morality.

I objected to Kim Davis because she denied an eligible citizen access to their legal rights.

The distinctions are clear to me.

But right now we are witnessing incredibly powerful corporations that control nearly everything we do in public life, from our careers to banking to communication to education to political activism act against us politically.

As individuals we cannot compete.

To me this is a debate on what corporations can do to an individual or deny an individual and not what corporations are forced to engage in themselves.

What is a public service online?
Could Twitter legally ban all black users?
Why not?
What's the legal reasoning?

If Civil Rights law can be applied at all in any case to social media and online companies, then it can be expanded to include everyone.

We must have a serious conversation about the legal rights of the individual online.