I just read an article on this. It's fake. The whole thing was a sham used to push this through the court. There was no web designer or gay couple. I thought this was wierd when I read it, because:
How could some petty matter make it that high up?
How could this ever actually happen in real life, when the business can say 'oh we're sorry we can't take on another job right now.' and avoid any costly legal proceedings??? For that matter, what customer is going to hold a business legally accountable to do work? Wouldn't they just like.. find someone else who will do the work?
A business turning down paid work in this economy? Totally BS
I don't see really an issue with this, because in principle, any business can turn down work and not give a reason, or give a BS reason, so... nothing changed in the real world. There's plenty of other people more than willing to do paid work.
It's pretty bad publicity for businesses now to be labelled as 'we don't serve gays here' so I don't see how this is good for them either.
Seems to be an example of legislation that solved a problem that didn't exist.
That's the part that pisses me off the most. All of this shit is happening because of lies. And the politicians know it's all lies. They don't care. Bread and circuses for their voters.
So, the judgement appears to make this distinction:
It’s still illegal to refuse to serve people from a protected class. One cannot refuse to serve gay people, for example.
One cannot be compelled to perform work which contradicts personal beliefs. For example, a website designer cannot be compelled to make an anti-gay website for a Muslim. While the Muslim is following their religious beliefs, and religion is a protected class, this ruling permits one to refuse to make the website.
I’m okay with this. I’m not sure how this is materially different to Masterpiece v. Colorado.
One cannot be required to perform work they disagree with, it’s a slight variation.
MAGA isn’t a protected class anyway, so you could do what you wanted.
But imagining it was, this continues the standard of of basically giving creative industries a lot of leeway in what they decide to make (since every piece of work is custom). Nobody can be forced to make a website for a gay wedding any more than they can be forced to make one for a MAGA rally. If you serve hamburgers though, you have to serve them to everyone, since the work doesn’t change.
Liberal here... Straight white male for reference... I've never seen the problem with this. Why force a biggot to do business with people? They should be called out and forgotten about.
I understand if they provide a service that cannot be acquired elsewhere, but that's rarely the case anymore.
That last part is especially true. Even if they can't openly declare it, people need to do things like grocery shop and work where they live. If they can't do it, then they need to leave. Essentially forcing places to become all white, cis, het
People keep saying "But they will go out of business!" No they won't. We have seen this before. Chances has it they will he perfectly fine, because a lot of people won't care enough to do anything. Like people who kept going to Chick Fil A, even after we learned the owner was donating the conversion therapy camps.
Some people really look back at the Civil Rights Movement as a mistake and pretend to be the rational ones.
It opens the door for people to discriminate against other protected categories of people.
Don't like gays, don't serve them. Don't Chinese people, don't serve them. Don't like people over 50 or under 30, don't serve them. Don't like women, don't serve them. Don't like me because I'm a veteran, don't serve me.
Basically any protected class can now be discriminated against if it aligns with your strongly held beliefs.
Bunch of originalist bullshit is what it really is.
I get what you're saying, but I still don't think we should be forcing biggots to do business with people. Let the biggots be flagged as biggots, so we all know which business to avoid.
Alternatively, we force them to do business with those people, and they do a shit job without revealing the reason.
Consider this in the context of a required service.
What if the doctor refused service because you were queer? How about lawyers?
Cakes and web design are used as the examples to make the problem seem less severe. It can and will extend much farther than what this ruling is based on.
I get where you're coming from, but if some business wants to discriminate against me, they can discriminate themselves all the way to bankruptcy. I'd prefer that rather than them being legally forced to do shitty work for me because they're dicks.
I hope you left that bar and posted that story about the bar and bartender on every social media website you could find. As well as leave reviews literally everywhere.
What if every bar in town refuses to serve black people? What if instead of bars, it was the only supermarket in town? Welcome to the South pre-civil rights. And don't tell me that people didn't know about it since it was pre-internet. It was widely-known about by pretty much everyone that being black in the South meant you were not allowed into all sorts of businesses.
And that's what you want to go back to. That's so liberal of you.
Are there religious beliefs out there that forbid one from doing business with another sect? I'd love to see someone use that to try and challenge this precedence.
Add comment