...and who, prey tell, would you nominate to determine whether something was "a danger to society." My hackles go up anytime someone specifies "society" as the proper determinant of anything. That's how political correctness got started.

Only because you allow it to.

So true!

However, Amazon is a private company, and should be able to pick what it sells. And we can pick not to shop through them.
Just pop on line and order from a retailer that does sell what you want.

Actually yes. An Objectivist should subscribe to open Capitalism. If there is a demand for the product, it should not be banned, unless it is a danger to society. Libertarians don't even care if it is a danger to society, ie. heroin, and other narcotics.
So if selling a Costume of a sexy burka is a danger to society, that must be admitting that Islam is a danger to society.
And, if Islam is a danger to society, then Trump would be right in requiring tougher vetting of muslums.
On the other hand, I fear what is happening here is that we ( our handlers) are saying Islam is a protected victim group, and Christians are fair game for pursicution.
After all, Christians believe that not even polititions, should lie, steal, or murder. Nor should Government dictate what your own moral conscience should accept or not.
And even Rand would agree that Capitalism allows one to choose to whom you offer your products and services to, and for what price.

Someone's trolling again. Feel free to disagree but keep you cotton picking fingers off the down thumb.

What does objectivism have to do with what your personal beliefs are? If you're an atheist, you're an atheist, if you're an objectivist you're an objectivist... never confuse the reality that membership in one does not mean you are a member of the other.

I started a boycott of Amazon, a number of years ago, due to their funding of same sex marriage initiative in Washington state.

The initiative passed which should concern Objectivists, especially considering the effect it has had upon businesses and persons who's beliefs were, then, declared inconsequential.

Amazon may not be a government agency, but it IS large enough to have a measurable effect upon our freedoms, unfortunately.

I hear Toys R Us pulled Hillary masks from the shelves, after multiple reports of crying children and 3 adults fainting.

Boy, you've got that right!

Banning anything gets me worked up, but Amazon being a non government organization has the right to vend or not vend any item it chooses. However, what it does or does not ban shows a lot about the nature of the company and in this case, its prejudices.

I come not to quibble but to expand upon your reply.
Whereas an enterprising capitalist in this country may fear offending Muslims peaceful and/or bad, unconstitutional Sharia law enabling progressives are only afraid of hurting their tender little feelings--the kinda feel good feelings too many Americans only use to vote with.

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize" - Voltaire

Amazon also won't list books in its search engine if they are "sexually oriented".

I find the whole anti-sex attitude annoying, but it is also an opportunity and someone will fill it if the law doesn't prevent it.

Private business, their choice.

Yes, Dino, long live free markets. Unfortunately, they aren't free any more. With the "sexy burka costume" if no one buys it, the whole thing goes away, and if it sells, that's fine, too.

Very well said. Another enterprising capitalist falls prey to P.C. Just shows you how afraid we are in this country of militant Muslims or for that matter any Muslim.

A non-atheist Objectivist is a contradiction in terms.

In a word, no. A private company should be able to sell pretty much anything. You don't have to buy it. If you are offended by what someone else sells, that tells me more about you than the vendor.

+1

+1 from free market dino.

One for the head and the other for the feet.
Now let's all have a sack race to the beach!
Hope the eye holes stay lined up--conk! ouch!-- with all that hopping around.

LOL! Thanks for my first good laugh this morning.

I think an Objectivist should not care about this.

If it was government intervention in private business that would be a different story. Then you should care.

However, this wasn't government intervention. If a business (like Amazon) thinks getting rid of a product is in their best interest they should be allowed to do so.

I updated your post to include the URL. If you click the headline now you'll be taken to the article.