>Marcia addressed your points very well.

I have no idea what you are refer here.

>
>I have one additional question.
>
>Suppose you run a company that builds websites. You are known in the industry and you have an established brand. When people see you websites, they say, "wow, that must be a Lutz Scheffler website".
>
>Suppose a group comes along whose actions you detest. It could be a supremacist group or some other group that practices discrimination.
>
>They want you to build a website for them. You refuse, stating that you don't want your brand associated with their practices.
>
>Should you be subject to civil and even criminal penalties for refusing to accommodate them?

Don't go that far. My business involves similar problems and I have rejected contracts because I dislike the company or the project.

You mix up thinks. I'm not on retail. I can do the terms of my business as I like. Somebody on retail or on a restaurant adresses general public, so he must serve everybody.
I do not. A retailer might have a stand terms and conditions, I have not. And there are good reasons to linit standard t&c.
One would need to have a special contract with me - I can make it unbearable. Just the way a bank calculates your mortage.
Because I'm free on my contracts, on the pricing and on the terms.

And again, if a retailer say no-aged-man-anymore because he belives in the red cucumber - would you be satisfied?
My question was: Where do you draw the line what the next religiot may do, abusing democratic law?

I agree that violence in bringing this business down is wrong. But the hate is on both sides and the US is a violent radicalised country - so it seems normal.