Is the term "homophobe" subjective?

[psychedelicsoul]

The fact that a company will not necessarily go out of business, but in fact will thrive in some cases.
You have been shown two point blank examples that clearly show this to be the case.

I know... but those examples were different than flat out denying someone for being gay. So how can you come to the conclusion that christians will support a place that flat out says "no gays allowed" since the examples you cited are not that? Since people can see a clear difference between the examples you posted and straight up discrimination.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I know... but those examples were different than flat out denying someone for being gay. So how can you come to the conclusion that christians will support a place that flat out says "no gays allowed" since the examples you cited are not that? Since people can see a clear difference between the examples you posted and straight up discrimination.

Why do you think those 2 examples do NOT demonstrate that?

How about Kim Davis denying marriage licenses to gay couples and all the support she has garnered from certain communities (including political/religious leaders)? Or is that just discrimination against an "event" also?

 

[psychedelicsoul]

Why do you think those 2 examples do NOT demonstrate that?

How about Kim Davis denying marriage licenses to gay couples and all the support she has garnered from certain communities (including political/religious leaders)? Or is that just discrimination against an "event" also?

I explained how Chik Fil A and Memories Pizza didn't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation already.

Kim Davis works for the government. She doesn't own anything, she's a public servant. So yes, it is discrimination against an event. However, she's public sector.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I explained how Chik Fil A and Memories Pizza didn't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation already.

Kim Davis works for the government. She doesn't own anything, she's a public servant. So yes, it is discrimination against an event. However, she's public sector.

<Sigh>

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I explained how Chik Fil A and Memories Pizza didn't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation already.

But you didn't. Profits from Chik Fil A go directly to anti-gay groups, meaning that Chik Fil A supports discrimination, and Memories Pizza flat out said they will refuse to service a certain event because they believe their religion gives them special privileges to pick and chose whom they will serve. If someone refused to cater the wedding of someone who is left-handed, black, Hispanic, of a certain age, or a number of other things, they would be breaking the law, it would be considered immoral, and it would be illegal.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

But you didn't. Profits from Chik Fil A go directly to anti-gay groups, meaning that Chik Fil A supports discrimination, and Memories Pizza flat out said they will refuse to service a certain event because they believe their religion gives them special privileges to pick and chose whom they will serve. If someone refused to cater the wedding of someone who is left-handed, black, Hispanic, of a certain age, or a number of other things, they would be breaking the law, it would be considered immoral, and it would be illegal.

Well yea, that's the problem. The law is sticking it's nose in peoples business. I think you should be able to deny service to a black wedding. I wouldn't support it but I'd support the freedom of others. I think that people should be left alone. Not doing something doesn't violate the harm principle. And if something doesn' violate the harm principle it should be legal.
Why do you think I support assisted suicide for any reason 100% of the time with no questions or medical recommendations required? I believe in the freedom to do whatever you want without hurting others

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And if something doesn' violate the harm principle it should be legal.

I agree. But discrimination causes harm.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

I agree. But discrimination causes harm.

I think forcing christians to take part in something is harmful.
I mean....
What if a satanist wanted something satanic from a print shop or a bakery or something like that. Should they be forced to do it? What if I wanted a black owned print shop to do something with racist imagery.

 

[Willamena]

But in the end, what you decide to call offensive is subjective.

What you decide to call offensive isn't what is offensive. That's the difference between subjective and objective.

End of debate.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

What you decide to call offensive isn't what is offensive. That's the difference between subjective and objective.

End of debate.

And nothing is "objectively offensive"... everything that you can call offensive is subjective

 

[Willamena]

And nothing is "objectively offensive"... everything that you can call offensive is subjective

But some things are actually offensive. People do get offended.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What if I wanted a black owned print shop to do something with racist imagery.

Print it anyways and donate the money to the NAACP or other race-issues group.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But discrimination causes harm.

People sometimes seem to forget that.

 

[The Sparrow]

... I think you should be able to deny service to a black wedding...

You mean, because they are black?
Yes, that would be racism.

I wouldn't support it but I'd support the freedom of others.

Their freedom to deny a customer service because they didn't like the colour of their skin?

...Not doing something doesn't violate the harm principle. And if something doesn' violate the harm principle it should be legal....

It is harmful to treat someone in a substandard manner because you don't like the colour of their skin.

I believe in the freedom to do whatever you want without hurting others

Denying someone service - treating them in a discriminatory fashion because of the colour of their skin, is harmful.

 

[Deidre]

Well yea, that's the problem. The law is sticking it's nose in peoples business. I think you should be able to deny service to a black wedding. I wouldn't support it but I'd support the freedom of others. I think that people should be left alone. Not doing something doesn't violate the harm principle. And if something doesn' violate the harm principle it should be legal.
Why do you think I support assisted suicide for any reason 100% of the time with no questions or medical recommendations required? I believe in the freedom to do whatever you want without hurting others

Discrimination and segregation cause harm, though. Sadly, some people need laws in our country to play well with others.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

That's not what "subjective" means.