Interesting post showing the differences between American and non-American attitudes

I'm watching the UK elections with some interest so this article, linked via Andrew Sullivan (who's starting to annoy me but that's another post), was of interest too. Background: the person who would become Home Secretary (equivalent to Secretary of the Interior) was commenting on a B&B operator who wanted not to rent rooms to gay couples. I'm not so concerned here about the subject matter of the article as about this comment:

Grayling's excuses for allowing on-going discrimination against gay people are bizarre. Nobody is forced to open a B&B. They choose to do so – and that means they can't turn away people based on arbitrary prejudices.

In the USA, that example would be turned completely on its head. It would read: "Nobody is forced to stay in a particular B&B. They choose to do so - and that means they can't force the owners to accept people they would want to turn away based on arbitrary prejudices." Because in the USA private parties are allowed to discriminate if they want to and there's not really all that much one can do about it.(*)

Americans often find it curious how non-Americans don't see the world the same way they do. This felt like a good way to show one difference in how a legal principle can set your way for viewing society.

(*) Yes I know that hotels are addressed specifically by an interstate commerce judgment whose cite I can't remember right now. But since it's the Masters and Augusta discriminates against women with no sanction, maybe you'll take the bigger point.