religious discrimination

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

Donray
Guru
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 8:25 pm
Location: CA

religious discrimination

Post #1

Post by Donray »

Should people be able to discriminant against others because of there religious views? For example should an ashiest be able to not rent to a christen because they think they worship a god? Should a Christain be able to discriminate against a Muslim and not rent a place for a wedding?

So the general question is should bigotry and discrimination be allowed for religious purposes?

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: religious discrimination

Post #21

Post by RightReason »

Purple Knight wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:44 pm My answer is that the principle should be nondiscrimination against everyone who consents to nondiscrimination.

So no to the KKK people. Yes to everyone else. Including NAMBLA. Protections against discrimination are for everyone who needs them, with the sole exception of people who would be gaining protection off a system of protection they would abolish. You might find NAMBLA distasteful (and I find it downright pukatronic, as in, my stomach actually turns when I think about them having sex with little boys) but yes, we should both be forced to rent our assembly halls to NAMBLA and treat them the same as any other guests if they pay the price we're asking. If protections don't apply to the disgusting, then there's no reason to have them.

But not racists. A law isn't required to help people destroy it.
But buying or wearing t-shirts isn’t racist. Do you agree they have the right to buy the t-shirts you sell and put whatever they want on it, even if you disagree with them or don’t like it? I’m pretty sure the ACLU has actually taken cases where they have defended the right of the KKK to assemble, regardless of how despicable you or I may think they are.

And you would really film a porn movie if you were a filmmaker? You don’t think you should have the right to decline that business?

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: religious discrimination

Post #22

Post by tam »

Peace to you,

I do not live in the States so I am not sure about the laws there, but here are my thoughts and guesses:
If you owned a t-shirt shop and someone wanted to print t-shirts that said KKK with a big swastika. Would you take the business?
I would not want to do that. But if the law requires it, then I would have to take the business or suffer the consequences for choosing to refuse. (I'm not sure if the laws on hate speech would cover this one or not.)
If you are a photographer or filmmaker and someone wanted you to photograph their porno shoot, do you have to take the job or can you decline?
I don't think this would be an issue. Photographers and filmmakers tend to be independent operators and can choose what jobs to take (or not); what they do is usually listed on their sites. No one can enter into a photographers shop and decide the photographer must shoot their pornographic film (or even just pornographic photos, unless the photographer lists that as something he/she shoots).

Just like no one can tell an author what kind of book they have to write. Or tell an artist what kind of canvass they have to paint.
If you are a baker, should you be forced to bake the cake of a polygamist man celebrating the marriage of him to his seven 19 year old brides?
If polygamy is legal, then yes. Granted, no one is actually forced to do anything (one can choose to break the law and suffer the consequences). But laws connected to owning and operating a public business are in place to protect people from discrimination. If you did not make yourself aware of those laws before beginning your business, then that is on no one else but you.
If you are a declared atheist, who teaches a course titled, “Debunking Christianity”, and is looking for someone else to take over the class, do you have to hire the devout practicing Catholic who meets all the educational and course requirements to teach the course?
Yes (if they are best qualified for the job). You cannot discriminate against anyone because of their religion, providing they are qualified and willing to teach the course as outlined. Though if you are teaching the course as a private operator and you decide to stop, I don't know why you'd hire someone to take over teaching that course. If you are teaching in a university, then the university would do the hiring (or cancel the course), and they would have to follow the same law that protects people from discrimination on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
Would you rent your banquet hall to NAMBLA (The North American Man/Boy Love Association) to have their annual meeting?

[NAMBLA is a pedophilia and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States. It works to abolish age-of-consent laws criminalizing adult sexual involvement with minors[2][3] and campaigns for the release of men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that did not involve what it considers coercion]
This is a tougher one (though maybe not from a legal point of view). I had to look up discrimination laws (which vary across the states). I'm not sure this group is considered a legally protected class (discrimination is refusing service to someone in a protected class). These are people advocating for something that is illegal (something that takes away the protections afforded to minors). I would not want to rent to them. But if they are a legal organization conducting legal affairs, and you are required by law to rent to them (in this case, I would definitely check), then you either follow the law or choose not to, and suffer any consequences attached to that.



**

The law is there to protect people from discrimination, and there are always going to be people who take advantage of laws meant to protect people who need protection. But you can either work to change a law that you find unfair (while adhering to it) - or you can suffer any consequences that come from not complying. But there are laws that are attached to owning and running your own business, including laws against discrimination. If you do not want to come up against them, then you might want to plan your business with that in mind (or work as an employee rather than as a business owner). As an employee, I would not refuse service to any of the above groups, despite how I feel about the first and the last example. I would follow the rules of my employment or I would leave my job (but I would not leave my job for either of those examples). I don't see that it should be any different when it comes to owning a business, though I admit that the idea of owning a business that must rent to the last group does make me more uncomfortable than simply serving them as an employee.


Peace again to you!

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: religious discrimination

Post #23

Post by tam »

[Replying to tam in post #23]

Oh... so to add to the last example of what I could do - something that could bring something good out of something bad - would be to take the rent received from the group for the hall (if I owned the business) or the salary/tip from the service I received from the group (if I was an employee)... and donate those funds to a cause that advocates FOR the PROTECTION of minors, instead. The opposite of what that group is advocating.


Then I am NOT partaking in what that group is advocating, nor am I profiting from it. This is what I received in the spirit while wondering and asking how I might yet act in love in the above examples (the law of love that is from God, from the beginning, against which there is no law). Christ and God always provide a way out, if we need one. This would be the way out that I would be able to take.


Praise JAH, and His Son, Jaheshua!


Peace again to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Donray
Guru
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 8:25 pm
Location: CA

Re: religious discrimination

Post #24

Post by Donray »

Tam explin why or did not answer my questions? I answered yours and you appear to not answer mine is that because you are a Christain bigot and have something ageist gays and lesbians'? Your examples have northing to do with Christians wanting laws to project there bigotry and discrimination.

So, answer my questions..... I did not ask you to comment on replies.

Do you think everyone has the right to discriminate and be a bigot for whatever reason? Should I be able to not to someone because they are religious? In your option should people discriminate because of some make belief in a bible that hates gays?

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: religious discrimination

Post #25

Post by tam »

Peace to you Donray,

[Replying to Donray in post #25]

I answered your OP in post 4, on page 1.

Unless you meant to address your questions to Right Reason, or mixed me (tam) up with Right Reason?



Peace again!

User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 2112
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 668 times
Been thanked: 407 times

Re: religious discrimination

Post #26

Post by Purple Knight »

RightReason wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:35 pmBut buying or wearing t-shirts isn’t racist.
Wearing or buying a shirt is racist if it's a KKK shirt.
RightReason wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:35 pmDo you agree they have the right to buy the t-shirts you sell and put whatever they want on it, even if you disagree with them or don’t like it?
No. I can put a Terms of Use on my t-shirts if I so desire. If they violate it, I'll see them in court.

Should I have a right to put "no smiley faces" or "no crosses" in my TOU? No. I'm discriminating.

Should I have a right to put "no racist symbols"? Absolutely. I'm still discriminating, but people do not have the right to be protected by laws they openly despise. In other words, they're discriminating. They want to have it both ways - to discriminate against others and be protected from discrimination while doing it. That's not how the world should work, imo.
RightReason wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:35 pmI’m pretty sure the ACLU has actually taken cases where they have defended the right of the KKK to assemble, regardless of how despicable you or I may think they are.
Then I disagree with the ACLU. NAMBLA, yes. The KKK, no. Arguably NAMBLA is more disgusting on a primal psychological level than the KKK. The KKK should induce more disgust in a moral person, but not everyone is at that level of morality. I'm not, but I'm at least trying. I'm working on altering my primal mind so that if one child was getting raped and one POC was being discriminated against, my snap judgment would be to ignore the child and run to help the POC.
tam wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:50 pmThis is a tougher one (though maybe not from a legal point of view). I had to look up discrimination laws (which vary across the states). I'm not sure this group is considered a legally protected class (discrimination is refusing service to someone in a protected class). These are people advocating for something that is illegal
They should be a protected class. They should be allowed to advocate the change of whatever laws they like (except those against racism) and be protected unless they're breaking those laws. I can say I think the law against owning a grizzly bear should be changed, and I should be protected. I should be able to organise likeminded people who want to change the law and we should all be protected. If I flout the law also and own a grizzly bear while it's still illegal, I go to jail.

Hopefully lawmakers don't take NAMBLA seriously. But they have a right to advocate for the repeal of whatever law they like (again, except any laws against racism).
RightReason wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:35 pmAnd you would really film a porn movie if you were a filmmaker? You don’t think you should have the right to decline that business?
I would want to be forced to if they can pay my price. What I wouldn't want is anyone to be locked out of having their message heard because all filmmakers refuse them. If that protects smut, so be it. The only thing it shouldn't protect is racism.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: religious discrimination

Post #27

Post by RightReason »

Donray wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 8:41 pm I answered yours and you appear to not answer mine is that because you are a Christain bigot and have something ageist gays and lesbians'?
I’m not sure why I am justifying your comment with a response. It doesn’t deserve one because you are calling me a Christian bigot for NO reason. I have nothing against people who have same sex attraction. I would never discriminate against someone for being gay. That doesn’t mean I have to encourage/support or participate in a gay wedding. I would never treat a woman who had an abortion any differently then anyone else, but it doesn’t mean I would support or participate in an abortion.
Your examples have northing to do with Christians wanting laws to project there bigotry and discrimination.
Your OP is a strawman. It isn’t bigoted to not participate in an abortion or gay wedding. As for discrimination, everyone is discriminatory about things they want to be discriminatory about. Your things just might differ from mine.
Do you think everyone has the right to discriminate and be a bigot for whatever reason?
I don’t think being discriminatory is equivalent to being a bigot. I can choose not to do business with racists and those involved in the porn or abortion industry. I also do not have to sing a song at your gay wedding if I think same sex relations are immoral. Would you be the entertainment act for the Man-boy love conference?
In your option should people discriminate because of some make belief in a bible that hates gays?
I already told you, I do not discriminate against a person just because he/she may have a same sex attraction. I also already told you my belief that same sex unions are immoral is not because of what the bible says. I don’t need the bible to know abortion, pornography, adultery, and homosexual acts are immoral. All of those things, regardless of legality, are wrong based on science/biology/reason/logic.

Post Reply