• SpaceToast@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    By your own words, you still aren’t getting it.

    You keep comparing it to businesses not serving black people, which is discrimination 100%.

    That’s not what happened here. The gay customers weren’t denied service. The developer just declined creating something that they don’t agree with.

    Here are some examples to make it easy for you.

    1. I’m selling cupcakes and refuse to sell to a gay couple. - illegal

    2. I’m selling cupcakes and a gay couple wants custom made cupcakes with rainbows and unicorns, but I don’t like unicorns so I decline. - legal

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reread what I just wrote. “The developer just declined creating something that they don’t agree with” is literally exactly the same justification people used to resist integration and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was discrimination then and it is discrimination now. There is no difference between your two examples except in your own mind. Certainly there is no difference before the law. (Except if the creator of the cupcake is Christian, apparently.)

      • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, realistically anyone who is creating websites for a living shouldn’t give a fuck about who they are creating it for. The KKK is a terrible example because that is 1. a hate group and 2. a group you join on your own volition. A business could take the same stance against anyone wearing BLM apparel, as that is a group you join on your own volition. Being a certain race or sexuality is not something you join on your own volition, you are a member of that category because of a trait you inherently have not because you decided to join a group.

        • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well said. Religion also gets included in that, which I think is much squishier in terms of “traits you inherently have,” but we definitely live in this world.

          • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, definitely less applicable to being a trait you inherently have. Religion is sort of its own thing- protected in the Bill of Rights accordingly.