I'll bet you know what I'm talking about.

It's antidiscrimination law, or "public accommodation." Oh my goodness, do they not want to talk about that.

Legalizing pot is A-OK, but if they said business owners shouldn't be forced to engage in transactions against their will, they'd be off the 3×5 card of allowable opinion — and they're going to hold on to that thing if it's the last thing they do.

Wouldn't want the Fed chairman to stop accepting their speaking invitations, you understand.

Yes, this is an unpopular position. But once we abandon the idea that property owners decide what takes place in their establishments, we wind up with the perverse, litigation-crazy situation we have today.

Bakers forced to bake cakes against their will is the classic recent example. To be sure, you will find some fashionable libertarians who will concede that people ought not to be forced to bake cakes — how gracious that kind concession! — but, never missing an opportunity for virtue-signaling, they make sure everyone knows their views on how stupid and awful the bakers are.

Meanwhile, since the Christians involved have accepted the principle of public accommodation, they are reduced to making pathetic and unpersuasive arguments for "religious liberty" laws granting them specific exemptions from the general rule.

It's more than baking cakes, of course. It's transgender bathrooms. It's having the state on your back if you throw disproportionate numbers of official victim groups out of your store for shoplifting. (You are assumed to be in the wrong, of course, because everyone knows shoplifting occurs in equal proportions across all groups.)

It's being afraid to throw certain people out of your hotel when they're disturbing other guests.

It's being afraid to fire people who do a lousy job or bring down morale.

And of course, it's the expectation that the state can make all manner of demands of you as a business owner, and you have to sit back and take it.