By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Freedom of business

teigaga said:
vivster said:

The first thread in this section with a matter that is extremely interesting to me.

I just saw the latest segment on the Dailyshow about the religious freedom act and how businesses should not have the right to discriminate against people based on their sexuality or whatever.

The thing is, I don't really get that. Why would a private business do not have the right to decide which customers to serve and which not?  It's their business and they already have their rules of cunduct and dress codes where they can deny anyone who does not obey to these rules. But when it comes to sexuality it suddenly crosses a line?

Since when is getting service at any private business a right?

The same goes hand in hand with employment. Why would I as a business owner not have the right to decide who I employ? Who says I have to employ gays or women or handicapped people? Since when is getting employment a right?

I really don't get this. It's not like there are no other businesses who allow any sort people to be serviced or employed. And if I go down because I lose business because of my stance then so be it. What part do civil rights groups and the government have in how I want to do my business?

It's just really weird that everyone talks about equality and rights but allowing an employer to decide who he is going to do business with is suddenly bad?

 

I also like to say that I do not own a business, don't have any friends or family who own a business or have any intention to ever own a business. I also have nothing against any minorities, sexualities, genders or whatever. I just like freedom.

 

Here is a little picture that has no civil rights group up in arms


Theres a distinction between that image you posted and actual discrimination regarding something someone is unable to change such as their race/sexuality. How many times have you been declined service because of your person? Not attire, but who you literally are. Its not even comparable.

Don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from because ultimately it comes under "freedom", but so does killing someone. At the end of the day we live in a society, you pay taxes and you don't really have a choice, the idea of unlimited freedom isn't feasible whilst you're part of an established system which true goal is to provide everyone with a standard of living.  This kind of "freedom" only sets society back, so its completely understandable that they people campaign against it and although I feel like society has got far enough that this doesn't need to be imposed by law, I  think its good that its discouraged.


" an established system which true goal is to provide everyone with a standard of living"

 

what you just described is communism 

people should be able to earn a living that is in line with the work that they put in not be entitled to a standard of living because they are a part of a society



Around the Network
The Fury said:

Many gay people do exactly that and not just to fit in or conform but because of fear of discrimination. Your wearing of a suit, or dislike of, does not affect your other employees, you could even voice this concern to other employees and they may join the conversation, agree or laugh with you, I doubt anyone would say "I don't want to work for this company because you don't like wearing suits". Yet a person hiding their sexuality because of what other employee's opinions is a little messed up.

'g word'? You mean gay? Don't fear the word, it's part of the topic of conversation.

I fear the g-word because I have been warned before even though it was a justified use.

But you're making a good point. The differnce is not what people feel but how other people react to it. While wearing a suit is an accepted norm of this society, being gay is not quiet there yet. Still, I will argue that the act of pretending something that you are not is the same for any matter. It's only made different by the environment you are in.

Another example that perfectly illustrates that. A man in a group of machos coming out as someone who likes to sit while peeing and a man in an office of lovable open and non-disciminatory people coming out as gay.

The social pressure is certainly higher in the first case, not because the matter is different but because of the surroundings.

So my comparison still stands.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
The Fury said:

On the employment thing you mention, no one is forcing anyone to employ someone based on sexuality, race or gender (unless it's specifically required) but rejecting someone, who could be very qualified and good for the position, because of these things is not right... even if it is your freedom to do so.

Nobody is forcing you for now but I can already see that women quota coming. I think people need to acknowledge that there are differences between people and genders that matter. If I want a young dynamic team that only consists of men because I think a woman would disrupt that dynamic somehow then I don't deserve to be called a shauvinist or to be forced to hire a woman or even worse, be sued because of discrimination. Hiring a woman would benefit no one in that situation, yet it is demanded by society and soon maybe even by law.

It's really a weird time we're living in where nobody knows what should be socially accepted and everybody is afraid to disagree to not end up as a social pariah. Even though I don't own a business I feel pressured by this society.

Biodeterminism is bunk science, as far as we know.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

The main problem is that nowhere in the bible does it say you can discriminate against others.
I fully understand not wanting to condone a gay marriage because of the implied sanctity of the ritual. There is no "freedom of religion". There are no rights being trampled on.
in fact in many parts of the bible it says to feed the hungry, turn the other cheek, and to be a Shepard for wayward sheep.
it specifically says, if one sheep of the flock should wander off, you MUST go out there to find it and bring it back into the fold.

But don't be mistaken, there are a lot of Christians who are against this law too. It's not so black and white.



vivster said:
teigaga said:

Dude are you serious?

Are you really comparing a uniform to sexuality? Even the line "act straight" is mis informed because it has nothing to do with acting, its who you are. Someone can "act" as straight as they want, but that has nothing to do with their sexuality which is determined by who you are attracted to, not how you act. Imagine someone refusing you a job because your girlfriend is blonde.

Code of conduct at work is one thing; "speak like this", "dress like this"... Essentially being asked to adjust your means of expression to fit a business/event. Someone can't just go home and change their race/gender/sexuality lol,  they are not means of expression.

Dude, what if I told you that a gay person could act in a way as to make people think they're straight? For example a man going with his boyfriend into restaurant while not holding hands, not kissing and not talking about how great the gay sex was they had last night. You don't have to change your personality to pretend you're someone else. I could easily pretend to be gay and people would believe me.

Yes, me acting gay is the very exact same thing as me acting as if I don't hate wearing that suit. It's an act. It's very easy but still very uncomfortable. I'm not asking people to change inside but only to the outside. An act is an act is an act is an act.

And yes being uncomfortable in what you are doing is universal no matter what uncomfortable thing you are doing.

But apparently a gay man being uncomfortable has more weight than another man being uncomfortable for a different reason.


The only reason why trying to disguise your sexuality would be relevant is to escape discrimination for being Gay which is the issue in the first place! lol

No one actually cares if you hate suits as long as you wear one and do your job well, if you're constantly whining that wouldn't be doing your job well. Descriminating on sexuality is the opposite of this, its something which has no basis in the work place unless you're selling sex.. Just like race/gender its something which can not be taken off like a peice of clothinge.

Essentially your above point about acting gay/straight is mute, its like asking someone who has a wife to pretend that they don't have a wife in order to get a job, or pretend that they don't go for blondes. Sure they could do it, but they shouldn't have to because descrimination based on marital statis shouldn't be a problem in the first place, the type of females you go for shouldn't be talking point, its your sexuality not a political statement. 



Around the Network
binary solo said:
I prefer to live in a society where freedom does not mean legally enabling bigotry in business practices. So I'm glad I live in a society where that is not allowed under the law.

Individual people are free to be bigotted arseholes in their own private lives, but when it comes to the work place and business environment that shit needs to be left at the door, and if you can't leave that shit at the door the law should make you leave that shit at the door.

Bingo. Freedom should only go so far as it is useful. Freedom to be bigoted in one's public dealings serves no good purpose and several bad ones.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

o_O.Q said:
teigaga said:

At the end of the day we live in a society, you pay taxes and you don't really have a choice, the idea of unlimited freedom isn't feasible whilst you're part of an established system which true goal is to provide everyone with a standard of living.


" an established system which true goal is to provide everyone with a standard of living"

 

what you just described is communism 

people should be able to earn a living that is in line with the work that they put in not be entitled to a standard of living because they are a part of a society

You're getting a bit caught up in semantics

Explain the minimum wage?
Why are there laws which apply to each and every citizen that protect them from physical abuse and harrasment and caution disruptive behaviour?

This is a standard of living.



Mr Khan said:

Biodeterminism is bunk science, as far as we know.

Yes, but I hope indoctrination is not yet debunked.

A person can't choose his upbringing. If you're raised by bigots you can't really be blamed for being a bit bigoted yourself. Because that was what you were taught as a child. Of course you can try to fight against it but I don't think everyone has the mental capacity to change or to reflect on oneself.

For example I was raised by very conservative and far left leaning east German parents who constantly complained about West-Germans, how great the life in east Germany was and how corporations and the governement are bad. For a while I was like that myself until I developed a mind of my own. I mean look at me now. While I'm not very conservative I am politically right leaning and I couldn't give 2 shits about east and west Germany.

But I wonder if anyone has a chance to make up their own minds. Especially if you have been brainwashed as a child.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
I see this is a very controversial topic.
It seems gender and sexuality really are hot button issues that receive more weight than any other attribute of the human existence.

The more I argue I'm seeing myself becoming more and more hypocritical. It's a very complex issue and it looks like this is not possible to fight with words as everyone has a different interpretation and world view of things. I'm accusing you of drawing arbitrary lines while I have my own lines thanks to my upbringing and own convictions.

Looks like the only things discussions like these lead to is people stating their insular view with no progress or compromises being made.

I'm going to keep that in mind when I'm thinking of opening another of these threads.

It seems my view of things is just too mechanical and asocial and rational when this would never work in a human society.

I still stand by my arbitrary lines though, because that's what people do.

Wait, did we all just get punk'd?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:

Biodeterminism is bunk science, as far as we know.


the funny thing is that the same people that claim it to be bunk contradict themselves regularly

 

lets take feminists as an example, biodeterminism is false so therefore men and women are equal

why therefore do they push the idea that women need more protection than men? because they then concede that men geenrally are stronger and more sexually driven than women

 

in reality it is a mix biology does obviously play a significant role in someone's development with regards to both physiology and psychology, but the environment also plays a significant role

 

its not one or the other but both