"It's libertarian to restrict people's freedoms."

The only valid human rights are property rights.

Ancaps are basically as bad as communists. Changing the all powerful monopoly in life from a dictatorial government to a dictatorial corporation doesn't change much. Both will abuse people if unchecked.

Today I learned, it's communism to advertise a service then punitively deny it specifically to certain groups. Totally not a breach of contract in any way.

"If you tell people you have a product, you must provide it to everyone."

I heard a good argument about that topic on one of Ben Shapiro's sunday specials. Idk which, but it was something like "You shouldn't be allowed to deny service to someone buying anything in stock, but you can deny service if that service is custom in that it will require you to make something specific for the purchase"

So a gay dude can buy a stock cake from a baker, but not ask for a cake with 2 dicks crossing streams

Why is that a good argument?

Oh so you're a bake the cake kind of guy

You're not very good at inferring my position from a question.

Which is fine, because I'm not sure that's a skill people can actually possess.

What makes offering a service to do custom jobs different from offering standard products?

If you are offering a service to people saying "describe a cake and ill bake it for you" how is that different from offering to bake 3 different flavors of cake at request?

Cause the custom service requires that the seller is having "expression forced into their mouth" cause they have to create something specific that may have a message that they don't agree with, where selling things in stock is a vendor like action where you have no input in the product except for the financial transaction itself.

So you can be forced to work, but not to speak.

I'm not articulating this as well as I heard, it. I wish I could find which Sunday Special it was.

Maybe an example would help me get my point across. I can sell anyone a blue cake, but I don't want to be forced to sell someone a cake that has my face on it that says "This guy is an evil Nazi" if they ask for something like that.

So the producer has the final say in what they make

You're basically advocating to force people to do business, to perform an economic transaction, when they don't want to.

In many circumstances, financial transactions themselves should be forced in my opinion. It really depends on the reason the seller wants to not engage in a simple financial transaction.

Custom services no, but in many situations financial transactions yes.

If you want to deny someone a financial transaction, it would need to be something to do with their actions

Okay, but you haven't claimed to be a libertarian, so it's still possible that your positions are internally consistent.

Like not wearing a clothes in public and wanting to buy shit at a Walmart.

Yeah I'm not an ancap. I think states are useful for some things

Conflating libertarians with ancaps is disingenuous.

No, when you provide a service you must provide it farily and to all

If the request breaks the law then the vendor/creator should not do it

But in this case it would make sense that the service to provide custom to order cakes would fall under the same limitations

Why must I provide a service to everyone when I provide a service to anyone?

Depends on the service. Restaurants shouldn't be able to refuse to give someone pasta unless they violate some kind of rule. But custom services that express a message should be able to be rejected if the message that is being asked that the servicer expresses is something they don't want to do.

Provide it to those whom you are able to so long as you have no resource limitations or time restrictions

If the bakery bakes people blue cakes on demand, they shouldn't be able to refuse, but if the bakery bakes people custom cakes, then they should be able to reject

Because otherwise people would be able to deny service based on arbitrary measures such as political orientation

Didnt vote democrat? no twitter account for you

So, then, I can refuse to sell someone a burger if I argue that my actions during that exchange constitute artistic expression?

No. There is no overt message in a burger.

The margins for "expressive services" should be very narrow

Ah, but there is a message in my actions during the process of selling a burger.

So only certain *kinds* of expressions are protected.

in business all transactions carry some sort of message