By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Rath on 03 September 2009
Edit Thread
Sqrl said:
Rath said:
I don't see how this is religious intolerance, it seems more to me intolerance by the religious. A marriage photographer couldn't say 'sorry, we don't do photos of black people' - why are they allowed to say 'sorry, we don't do photos of gays'?

The government has the obligation to enforce equal treatment for everybody.

Wait...what?  So in your view the government could/should force me to treat someone I don't like/approve of/etc...the same as someone I do like/approve of? 

People have a right to be intolerant idiots so long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. If they want to talk about it or put a sign up they can, but nobody should be able to force them to.

Elements of the gay community and their supporters have been intolerant, in several instances, towards religious people.  I'm not talking about fighting for their rights by advocacy or lobbying just to be clear. I'm talking about listing names and numbers of private citizens who supported prop 8 on a website and encouraging people to call them or go to their houses.

The goal of the gay rights movement is not, and should not be, to make everyone agree with the gay lifestyle, it should be to achieve equal rights under the law.  When people take it past that and get up in people's faces for not approving of a gay lifestlye personally they are in the wrong, plain and simple.  It's no different than when a religious person gets in a gay person's face to ridicule them for being gay.  Both are examples of ignorant intolerance, this underlies the very philosophy behind the movement to begin with - that nobody has the right to tell someone else what to think/feel/do. Even when someone believes something completely and utterly dispicable they have the right to believe it.  As it has been said, the concept of freedom of speach exists, not to protect popular speach, but to protect unpopular speach.

Put simply, you can't legislate people's thoughts.  Despite the efforts of many a tyrant.

I think you mis-understood my post Sqrl. I'm saying it should be illegal to refuse a service to somebody because of their sexuality, just as it should be to do so because of their race. I'm not saying the government has to enforce acceptance or even tolerance of homosexuality (because the government can't - as you pointed out) but the government does have an obligation to ensure that gays are treated equally in practice.

Now they shouldn't be forced to put a sign up, but they shouldn't be allowed to refuse the service in the first place! There should be no need for these signs at all.

Edit: The only people who should be allowed to refuse service to gays are churches (or other places of worship), who should be allowed to decide whether they want to perform gay marriage ceremonies or not.