We are all equal again, right?

[hollodero]

(06-30-2023, 07:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: However, I will say no because refusing services on the basis of race or ethnicity is not only illegal in this country, but in my opinion it is immoral. (yet some still do..)

But why is it illegal/immoral on the basis of race or ethnicity, but not on the basis of sexual orientation?

[Lucidus]

(06-30-2023, 07:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That hypothetical makes no sense.  However, I will say no because refusing services on the basis of race or ethnicity is not only illegal in this country, but in my opinion it is immoral. (yet some still do..)  Now, how you are going to tie discrimination based upon race to refusing service on account of religious beliefs should be interesting reading.

So, you don't think race or ethnicity should be grounds for denial of service if there's a religious objection. Are you saying sexuality would be a legitimate and / or moral reason? If so, could you please explain that rationale? I'm honestly curious as to the justification.

If you and and I went for an ale and they refused to serve me based on their religious beliefs about homosexuality, would you be OK with that? Would you not consider it discrimination if I were denied the same service you were granted, simply because of who I'm attracted to?

[SunsetBengal]

(06-30-2023, 07:11 PM)hollodero Wrote: But why is it illegal/immoral on the basis of race or ethnicity, but not on the basis of sexual orientation?

(06-30-2023, 07:15 PM)Lucidus Wrote: So, you don't think race or ethnicity should be grounds for denial of service if there's a religious objection, but sexuality would be legitimate grounds? Could you please explain that rationale? I'm honestly curious as to the justification.

If you and and I went for an ale and they refused to serve me based on the religious beliefs about my homosexuality, would you be OK with that? Would you not consider it discrimination if I were denied the same service you were granted, simply because of who I'm attracted to?

To answer both of your questions in one answer, it is illegal and in my opinion immoral to discriminate on people based on race or ethnicity.  Personally, I don't feel like we should discriminate based upon sexual orientation or mental disorder, but some still do.  The are legally allowed to because we are also a Nation that guarantees one's freedom of religion, and forcing someone to participate or provide services for a person or event that violates their said religious beliefs is also a protected position in this Nation.  You can disagree all you want, but the fact that both the religious followers and the marginalized groups are protected populations still exists.  In other words one persons rights don't end where another's beging.

[hollodero]

(06-30-2023, 07:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: To answer both of your questions in one answer, it is illegal and in my opinion immoral to discriminate on people based on race or ethnicity.  Personally, I don't feel like we should discriminate based upon sexual orientation or mental disorder, but some still do. The are legally allowed to because we are also a Nation that guarantees one's freedom of religion, and forcing someone to participate or provide services for a person or event that violates their said religious beliefs is also a protected position in this Nation.

So, what this points to is calling discrimination based on sexual orientation less severe than discrimination based on race or ethnicity. Can't be any other way. For these two forms of discrimination are treated differently here, legally and morally. And I have a problem with this kind of distinction. For to me, clearly any form of discrimination is wrong and equally wrong, no matter if it's on the grounds of race or on the grounds of sexual orientation.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-30-2023, 07:31 PM)hollodero Wrote: So, what this points to is calling discrimination based on sexual orientation less severe than discrimination based on race or ethnicity. Can't be any other way. For these two forms of discrimination are treated differently here, legally and morally. And I have a problem with this kind of distinction. For to me, clearly any form of discrimination is wrong and equally wrong, no matter if it's on the grounds of race or on the grounds of sexual orientation.

See, there's the difference.  You live in Austria and we are here in the US, we have differences.  My Grandmother on my Mother's side came from France, she tried to explain the cultural differences to me when I was young.  I wish that I could have gotten to know her better as an adult.

[hollodero]

(06-30-2023, 07:37 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: See, there's the difference.  You live in Austria and we are here in the US, we have differences.  My Grandmother on my Mother's side came from France, she tried to explain the cultural differences to me when I was young.  I wish that I could have gotten to know her better as an adult.

Yeah sorry, but this has nothing to do with cultural differences or me being from Austria.

If religious freedom is, in your view, of course always less important than not discriminating on the basis of race/ethnicity, but when it comes to sexual orientation it's somehow a different story, then you declare one form of discrimination as worse than the other and that is for anyone around the globe to see.

To be clear, I am not accusing you of endorsing discrimination or anything nefarious. But I have an issue with this distinction.

[Lucidus]

(06-30-2023, 07:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: To answer both of your questions in one answer, it is illegal and in my opinion immoral to discriminate on people based on race or ethnicity.  Personally, I don't feel like we should discriminate based upon sexual orientation or mental disorder, but some still do.  The are legally allowed to because we are also a Nation that guarantees one's freedom of religion, and forcing someone to participate or provide services for a person or event that violates their said religious beliefs is also a protected position in this Nation.  You can disagree all you want, but the fact that both the religious followers and the marginalized groups are protected populations still exists.  In other words one persons rights don't end where another's beging.

Why did you list sexual orientation with mental disorder? 

Religious people can now deny service to homosexuals and have it upheld by the SCOTUS.
Homosexuals could never deny service to religious people and have it upheld by this SCOTUS.

Notice that the freedom of one group is deemed more important than the freedom of the other. 

[*Synric*]

(06-30-2023, 07:37 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: See, there's the difference.  You live in Austria and we are here in the US, we have differences.  My Grandmother on my Mother's side came from France, she tried to explain the cultural differences to me when I was young.  I wish that I could have gotten to know her better as an adult.

People discriminate everywhere just for different reasons. We discriminate by where people are from, their accent, their hair color, how they dress, tattoos & piercings, etc...

Anyone that believes equality will ever happen has never met or spoken to another human being.

[samhain]

(06-30-2023, 07:50 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Why did you list sexual orientation with mental disorder? 

Religious people can now deny service to homosexuals and have it upheld by the SCOTUS.
Homosexuals could never deny service to religious people and have it upheld by this SCOTUS.

Notice that the freedom of one group is deemed more important than the freedom of the other. 

I'm forever weirded out over the fact that a business, ie an entity that is in place to generate revenue, is going to the highest court in the land to fight for their right to NOT take money from customers.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-30-2023, 07:50 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Why did you list sexual orientation with mental disorder? 

Religious people can now deny service to homosexuals and have it upheld by the SCOTUS.
Homosexuals could never deny service to religious people and have it upheld by this SCOTUS.

Notice that the freedom of one group is deemed more important than the freedom of the other. 

Because I feel like some with this "gender dysphoria" are just struggling with mental disorder.  Somehow they feel like that they can't fulfill the role as their born gender, and would likely fair better if "transitioned" to the opposite sex.  I feel like this is mainly an ego driven, attention getting scheme for many.

No, religious people cannot simply deny service because people are homosexual, it must put them in a position to go against their core beliefs.  For example, if a gay person walks up to a sandwich stand and asks for a sandwich, he gets served with no questions asked.  If a gay couple go to a Muslim baker and ask for a beautiful cake to celebrate their union, the baker has the right to ask them to look elsewhere for that service.

The freedom of one group is prioritized over the other because that is one of the founding tenants of this Nation.  Get it??  1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech and Religion.  In my opinion, the people providing services should have the right to refuse service to anyone.  That is their right as business operators.

[Lucidus]

(06-30-2023, 07:50 PM)Synric Wrote: People discriminate everywhere just for different reasons. We discriminate by where people are from, their accent, their hair color, how they dress, tattoos & piercings, etc...

Anyone that believes equality will ever happen has never met or spoken to another human being.

Where would America - and the civilized world - be if every marginalized group had adopted this mentality? 

[*pally*]

(06-30-2023, 07:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That hypothetical makes no sense.  However, I will say no because refusing services on the basis of race or ethnicity is not only illegal in this country, but in my opinion it is immoral. (yet some still do..)  Now, how you are going to tie discrimination based upon race to refusing service on account of religious beliefs should be interesting reading.

First of all today's case was hypothetical...the web designer who filed the case never was asked to make a wedding page for a gay couple.

Secondly...in Colorado, where she lives, it is illegal to discriminate against sexual orientation

[*Synric*]

(06-30-2023, 08:35 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Where would America - and the civilized world - be if every marginalized group had adopted this mentality? 

There is a saying "never judge a book by its cover" but we literally pick up a book in a shop read the cover and that's how we decide to buy that book.

We judge off first impressions alot. That's why we say things like "dress for the job you want not the one you have" and "you never get a second chance at a first impression". That's discrimination. 

Employers discriminate by college all the time it's actually a major thing. Just because the college is better doesnt make every student better but that doesnt matter.

[Lucidus]

(06-30-2023, 08:24 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because I feel like some with this "gender dysphoria" are just struggling with mental disorder.  Somehow they feel like that they can't fulfill the role as their born gender, and would likely fair better if "transitioned" to the opposite sex.  I feel like this is mainly an ego driven, attention getting scheme for many.

Do you also consider identifying as a religious person to be a mental disorder. Afterall, no one is born religious. They not only have to identify as religious at some point, but in most cases, identify as being a particular type of religious. That's a lot of identifying as things they were not inherently born with. According to your logic, they transitioned from no religious beliefs at birth to multiple religious beliefs at some point later. Was that transition ego-driven, an attention seeking scheme or just a need to fulfill a role in society?

Quote:No, religious people cannot simply deny service because people are homosexual, it must put them in a position to go against their core beliefs.  For example, if a gay person walks up to a sandwich stand and asks for a sandwich, he gets served with no questions asked.  If a gay couple go to a Muslim baker and ask for a beautiful cake to celebrate their union, the baker has the right to ask them to look elsewhere for that service.

Why does the Muslim have that right; simply because of a belief? What if that same Muslim business owner denied service to all white or female customers because of certain religious beliefs? Should that be legal? 

Quote:The freedom of one group is prioritized over the other because that is one of the founding tenants of this Nation.  Get it??  1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech and Religion.  In my opinion, the people providing services should have the right to refuse service to anyone.  That is their right as business operators.

Honestly, I'm not even sure how to respond to this, other that to say it's disheartening to hear.

[*Nately120*]

(06-30-2023, 08:24 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because I feel like some with this "gender dysphoria" are just struggling with mental disorder.  Somehow they feel like that they can't fulfill the role as their born gender, and would likely fair better if "transitioned" to the opposite sex.  I feel like this is mainly an ego driven, attention getting scheme for many.

No, religious people cannot simply deny service because people are homosexual, it must put them in a position to go against their core beliefs.

I have to admit when a religious person starts telling me why it's wrong to be gay I start getting "mental illness" vibes from them.  I mean come on, god hasn't turned anyone into a pillar of salt lately, I think he's cool with the ghey stuff now.

(06-30-2023, 09:18 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Do you also consider identifying as a religious person to be a mental disorder. Afterall, no one is born religious. They not only have to identify as religious at some point, but in most cases, identify as being a particular type of religious. That's a lot of identifying as things they were not inherently born with. According to your logic, they transitioned from no religious beliefs at birth to multiple religious beliefs at some point later. Was that transition ego-driven, an attention seeking scheme or just a need to fulfill a role in society?

I was groomed to be religious when I was a kid.  Thems the breaks.  I'm not bitter, I can just admit it.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-30-2023, 07:11 PM)hollodero Wrote: But why is it illegal/immoral on the basis of race or ethnicity, but not on the basis of sexual orientation?

You cannot deny service to anyone based on any of those. You can refuse to perform a service. So you can say I don’t want to make a wedding site for a couple, but you cannot refuse to do work for a person because they are gay.

[NATI BENGALS]

Haven’t read the legal mumbo jumbo.

But a law forcing you to consider someone’s race. Is dumb.

Need to stop telling people they are victims.

If I told a kid every day he was going to have a tough life because of his skin color. That kid is going to be racist as hell when he gets older and perpetually feel like a victim.

If you could show me every admissions office in every major college was a white guy who rejects every non white I may agree we need a law to try something different.

But I guarantee there is a lot of diversity in the vast majority of every college admissions office.

I never understood how allowing racial bias is supposed to stop racial bias.

[BengalYankee]

(06-30-2023, 09:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I mean come on, god hasn't turned anyone into a pillar of salt lately, I think he's cool with the ghey stuff now.

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-30-2023, 01:21 PM)pally Wrote: So yeah, color me doubtful, that this decision is where they stop.  They are bound and determined to take this country back to the days when the only people who were truly equal were white, straight, males.

And people wonder why minorities and women and up in arms.  We see where this is going

When the media and politicians prey on your emotions and use fear mongering tactics to make you believe that the white man is getting his whips and chains ready, then yes, you will be up in arms.

The white man says "Never forget 9/11". But I say "Never forget Jussie Smollett".

[BigPapaKain]

(06-30-2023, 08:24 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because I feel like some with this "gender dysphoria" are just struggling with mental disorder.  Somehow they feel like that they can't fulfill the role as their born gender, and would likely fair better if "transitioned" to the opposite sex.  I feel like this is mainly an ego driven, attention getting scheme for many.

No, religious people cannot simply deny service because people are homosexual, it must put them in a position to go against their core beliefs.  For example, if a gay person walks up to a sandwich stand and asks for a sandwich, he gets served with no questions asked.  If a gay couple go to a Muslim baker and ask for a beautiful cake to celebrate their union, the baker has the right to ask them to look elsewhere for that service.

The freedom of one group is prioritized over the other because that is one of the founding tenants of this Nation.  Get it??  1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech and Religion.  In my opinion, the people providing services should have the right to refuse service to anyone.  That is their right as business operators.

What the hell does gender dysmorphia have to do with homosexuality?

I know a bunch of gay folks who aren't trans and don't have gender dysmorphia - they're guys/girls who act like guys/girls who just happen to be sexually attracted to other guys/girls. On that same token, I know a few trans people who are straight as an arrow.