Public Accommodation and Social Engineering

Last weekend, city officials in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho ordered the owners of a local wedding chapel to conduct same-sex marriages or face jail time. One-hundred-and-eighty days of jail time, to be exact, plus a $1,000 fine for each day they continue to decline.
The chapel’s owners, ordained ministers, are suing on the grounds of religious freedom, saying the mandate forces them to contradict their religious beliefs.
But while the religious freedom perspective on this dispute is probably better for the chapel’s public relations, this issue is just as much economic as religious. Without the specious concept of ‘public accommodation,’ disputes like this wouldn’t arise. Only because this category is accepted in the first place can the courts find justification for forcing vendors to service the demands of customers in ways that defy their religious convictions.
Public Accommodation
According to Congress, ‘public accommodations’ are businesses and facilities open to the general public. The idea first made its way into American law by way of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title II of that Act prohibits discrimination in places of ‘public accommodation.’ Specifically, the law reads:
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin.

This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on Friday, October 24, 2014.