Indiana law now makes it legal for businesses to discriminate against gay customers

[PorkChop]

Great. Who cares, honestly? If you've got your own business and want to exclude people, I mean, it should be your call. This loses business anyway.

How about restaurants let gays in but they can't sit at a table they have to go to the counter? Maybe separate bathrooms so the straights don't have to feel uncomfortable. Hell maybe we should have a straight water fountain and a gay one.

If they so please. They won't get much business in the long run.

Why do you seem to have a problem with gay and trans people?

[Circled Square]

Because this is my opinion, on all these issues, on discrimination, on anything. Let businesses be bigoted shitheads, they can have the right to do so...who cares? Like honestly? It's not as if say, Joe's bakery doesn't serve Gay people, well they can go down to Bob's Bakery, who do serve Gay people. It's like meth being legal. Would you start doing meth if it was legal? No. Non-violent protest of anybody should be legal, in my opinion. Don't shoot them on sight lmao but you should have the right to not serve somebody.

Would you not let Gay people into your business just because you can legally? No!

[War Daddy]

This law affects everybody, not just gays.

[Daz]

Because this is my opinion, on all these issues, on discrimination, on anything. Let businesses be bigoted shitheads, they can have the right to do so...who cares? Like honestly? It's not as if say, Joe's bakery doesn't serve Gay people, well they can go down to Bob's Bakery, who do serve Gay people. It's like meth being legal. Would you start doing meth if it was legal? No. Non-violent protest of anybody should be legal, in my opinion. Don't shoot them on sight lmao but you should have the right to not serve somebody.

Would you not let Gay people into your business just because you can legally? No!

You're failing to see the bigger picture. This isn't just one business owner deciding to arbitrarily discriminate against gay people because he's decided not to like them this week. It was passed into law throughout an entire state, which sets a dangerous precedent for civil rights and equality, of all types of people, not just the LGBTQ community. The question isn't who cares? but why don't you?

[Chewy]

The law was said to allow for "religious freedom", yet I don't see the law stopping adulterers or people who eat the wrong kinds of food from entering.

The real problem is the types that eat shellfish.

[Viazon]

@Circled Square can I ask you a question? And please, if I am out of line and you really don't feel like answering, then I apologize. But what is your race/nationality/ethnicity/religion?

[Hanley!]

Because this is my opinion, on all these issues, on discrimination, on anything. Let businesses be bigoted shitheads, they can have the right to do so...who cares? Like honestly? It's not as if say, Joe's bakery doesn't serve Gay people, well they can go down to Bob's Bakery, who do serve Gay people. It's like meth being legal. Would you start doing meth if it was legal? No. Non-violent protest of anybody should be legal, in my opinion. Don't shoot them on sight lmao but you should have the right to not serve somebody.

Would you not let Gay people into your business just because you can legally? No!

So let me get this straight: you would also support a law that legalised crystal meth? Just because you don't have to do it if you don't have to? I see the point you're making, but it's a pretty terrifying one. Out of curiosity, are you an anarchist? Because that's the route this line of thinking seems to be leading down.

It's true that usually doing bad things will usually bring some kind of negative consequence down on the person who does these things. And that often society will punish those who commit these terrible acts without the need for state intervention. But that doesn't mean laws banning these crimes don't serve a purpose.

To use the meth comparison: if it was legalised, it would become easier to find. There are probably many people out there now who would do the drug but don't have access to it. Or who would do the drug more if they had more access to it. And if meth was easy to come across, more people might be persuaded to take it due to curiosity or being easily influenced. There would likely be more competition between dealers and it would become cheaper, which would make it even more dangerous. More people get addicted, more people get sick, more people die.

And sure if someone's buddy gets killed after taking meth, they might not buy from that dealer again. They might even beat the shit out of him. The evil shit he did will probably come back to bite him in the ass. But people are still dead. You can't tell me that forbidding the sale of the drug in the first place isn't preferable.

And it's the same with this Indiana law. Sure business men will likely be punished if they choose to be assholes. They might lose some business. But why encourage people to be assholes in the first place? Sure gay people can go eat at Bob's Bakery, but they're going to be upset that they were turned away from Joe's Bakery just because of their sexual preference. It could ruin their whole day. Why encourage that behaviour? What possible good could come from it?

Lets not forget either, that while Joe might be a cunt, he's not the one who decided it was okay to treat gay people this way. Indiana's government decided it was okay. Those who are being discriminated against aren't going to just think "that Joe is a right bastard, I'd rather not give him business anyway". They're going to be thinking about how their own government hates them and thinks of them as lesser people. That's not a problem you can solve by eating at Bob's.

So no, this law is just bad and those who campaigned for it should feel bad. The end.

[The Legend]

Here's the problem with this. The closed-minded bigots always wind up hurting everyone. Take for example the businesses of people that don't believe in this law. They are about to lose money as well as those that are bigoted. Indianapolis holds Game Con every year, they've already said that unless the law is repealed they will likely take their business elsewhere. The NCAA has already hinted strongly that they won't be bring March Madness back any time soon. Indianapolis also holds the Big Ten Men's and Women's basketball tournament every year in addition to the conference football championship - all of those events are in danger. To say nothing of future Super Bowl bids and the annual scouting combine from the NFL. Last year when Arizona was about to enable a similar act the NFL threatened to take the Super Bowl away until they decided against the law in Arizona.

Tourism is an extremely important element of our economy in today's post-manufacturing world in America and this decision appears as if it is going to take millions of tourism dollars away from Indiana and not just the businesses that support the bill, but the businesses that are against it in the first place.

[Circled Square]

It's because laws like these give you the ultimate freedom. I will disagree with with what you say, but will fight to the death for you to have the right to say it. Now as far as tourism goes, Indiana's pretty..well, subpar. I did a simple Google Search and it's not in the top 20. Besides, if we're talking international tourism, who's going to know about this law being passed, honestly? Like if we're being realistic here - are Olga and Darko going to know, or care, about this law being passed in Indiana? Hell, even if a Gay couple visited, what are the odds they'd run into the one business that doesn't cater to Gay people?

Why is the attitude "You shouldn't have the right to decline my business", when you should support businesses' that do serve Gay customers? It's stupid to take away that right. It's a social taboo to be anti-Gay nowadays. I personally believe that this is an extension of Free Speech. The right to serve whoever you'd like because it's your business, you run it, you're in charge of it.

I brought up the Meth thing because of shock value. The point, although it's not necessarily the best example, still stands, regardless. Meth won't become "easier" to get if legal, it's not as if you'd see Jimmy's Meth House down the road...it's just not illegal in this hypothetical world. You decriminalize it however, and it may even DECLINE in usage. Meth's an extreme of course, but for kids a lot of smoking weed is just doing something...bad. Frowned upon. You take that away, and instead of being a rebel who get's high, he's an idiot who gets high. You take that edge away, from doing it, if it's not against the law. IDK. I don't think I get my point across clearly here. Abolishing drugs isn't right IMO...you should have the freedom to choose what you want to do in your life. Shouldn't be thrown in a cell for injecting heroin. Waste your life...it's your life. Not the governments.



If you're raised to be tolerant, you're not going to all of a sudden not let Gays into your business, just because you can. This is a right - the right to serve who you want - and it's a basic one. Stop living in a sheltered hugbox. People are going to be intolerant, let them. They should be able to do that. So fuck being politically correct, make a statement, even if it's a retarded one, you should have the right to do so.

@Viazon
I'm black, I've stated that a couple times. Born in Michigan, I live in Canada. Was raised a Catholic Christian...became an Atheist. I'd say I'm more of a Nihilist, if anything.

[The Legend]

^^^ OK, I have to call you out on one thing. Freedom of Speech doesn't apply here or pretty much anywhere around this topic. Freedom of Speech was designed purely that you can't be arrested for speaking out on the government. It wasn't designed to protect someone from consequences when they spew hateful things about any group of people. Also, Freedom of Religion was designed to protect a person's right to believe and live their life in whatever way they believe. That right stops when they start applying their beliefs to other people like they do when they refuse to serve a group of people that don't believe the same things they do purely because they don't believe the same things.

[Everlong]

Freedom of Speech doesn't apply here or pretty much anywhere around this topic. Freedom of Speech was designed purely that you can't be arrested for speaking out on the government. It wasn't designed to protect someone from consequences when they spew hateful things about any group of people.

There are way too many people on the internet who don't seem to understand this.

[Circled Square]

^^^ OK, I have to call you out on one thing. Freedom of Speech doesn't apply here or pretty much anywhere around this topic. Freedom of Speech was designed purely that you can't be arrested for speaking out on the government. It wasn't designed to protect someone from consequences when they spew hateful things about any group of people. Also, Freedom of Religion was designed to protect a person's right to believe and live their life in whatever way they believe. That right stops when they start applying their beliefs to other people like they do when they refuse to serve a group of people that don't believe the same things they do purely because they don't believe the same things.

I feel ya. I just couldn't think of a better word for it, really. In the modern world, it's been grouped together with things like the right to protest social injustices. Or am I wrong? If I am, I'd like to learn more about it, so feel free to tell me.

It's pretty clear that laying with another man is forbidden in the bible. I think the Bible is a crock of shit mind you, but I'm just saying - say if like a Christian family, like an extremist, non-contextual, 100% believer opens up a Fish n Chips place lol...they should have the right now to take anyone they don't want to take in. I just don't gve a fuck, tbh...like as a black man, even if say segregation came back, like say I couldn't enter business because they only serve _____...sure it's bad, yeah, but I'd rather live in a society that lets people have the choice. Basically I put the rights of others over my own.

[Circled Square]

Freedom of Speech doesn't apply here or pretty much anywhere around this topic. Freedom of Speech was designed purely that you can't be arrested for speaking out on the government. It wasn't designed to protect someone from consequences when they spew hateful things about any group of people.

There are way too many people on the internet who don't seem to understand this.

There are way too many people on the internet who throw around words like hateful and not realizing that it's the best gift you've got in the world. I love the fact somebody can hold a sign that says "God Hates Fags"...because I can hold a sign calling them all types of slurs or w/e, because it's my right. Political correctness must die. It's truly the most equal system available. You hate me, I can hate you. When you start disturbing the peace, well, that's a different story.

[The Legend]

It's pretty clear that laying with another man is forbidden in the bible. I think the Bible is a crock of shit mind you, but I'm just saying - say if like a Christian family, like an extremist, non-contextual, 100% believer opens up a Fish n Chips place lol...they should have the right now to take anyone they don't want to take in. I just don't gve a fuck, tbh...like as a black man, even if say segregation came back, like say I couldn't enter business because they only serve _____...sure it's bad, yeah, but I'd rather live in a society that lets people have the choice. Basically I put the rights of others over my own.

You bring up segregation and that's really what it is social segregation as opposed to racial segregation. Here's the problem, refusal of a business to serve someone is really only the start of it. Would you still be okay with segregation if it meant every company that wanted to could deny you employment based on your skin color or sexual orientation? That would severely limit people's opportunity for career and lifestyle advancement. It creates glass ceilings that people can't break through and would essentially guarantee in this case that gays would be forced into economic disadvantages just like blacks have been for generations.

Also, you say put others rights in front of yours and I get that, but here's the problem this is a case where gays rights are being blocked, not the other way around. Laws making a person serve all people don't really interfere with their rights. They can still personally believe anything that they want. They can hate the people they are serving. No one is taking that right away from them. People are just taking away the opportunity to hatefully take the rights of others away. This law isn't about increasing the rights of Christians, it's taking away the rights of gays. Before this law people could hate gays. After this law people can hate gays. That right hasn't been taken away from them.

The law is more about the fact that most people want to live in a society where you can feel how you want, but at the end of the day if you want to take part in this society then you have to learn how to at least cordially deal with all people on a professional level.

I mean seriously, we all are part of the business world to one degree or another and we all deal with people in our jobs that we like and we deal with people we don't like. You do what you have to do and you move on. Really, this is about people acting like three-year old stupid little sheltered brats that never learned how to deal with the real world.

[Circled Square]

See I think that logic works in a smaller setting. Indiana is a big place. We live in a world of strip malls and big mega stores. So it's not as if they are denied a human right - as if there is NO other option. I hate to mention the Bakery thing, but it applies. Joe doesn't cook you bread? Bob will. Now say you live in an isolated area, a one horse town, and the biggest shop doesn't let you in..that's a problem. Indiana isn't a small place man. They can just as easily drive down the street to the next option. I know that it can come from a personal hatred for sure, but it's not as they've got a sign that says "No Fags", you know what I mean?

Now I agree that it's good to live in a world where people co-exist with each other in harmony, but it's not the world we live in, unfortunately. We are...diverse, to say the least, with that comes problems, different cultures clashing. It's more reasonable to give them the right to exclude whoever they want to, compared to the unrealistic goal of complete acceptance from all parties. That's just my take on it.

[Viazon]

@Viazon
I'm black, I've stated that a couple times. Born in Michigan, I live in Canada. Was raised a Catholic Christian...became an Atheist. I'd say I'm more of a Nihilist, if anything.

So let me ask you this. If a state passed a law where it became legal for businesses to discriminate against black customers, that would be ok to you? How would that make you feel?

Also, to press on another thing you said.

Hell, even if a Gay couple visited, what are the odds they'd run into the one business that doesn't cater to Gay people?

I could be walking home after a night of drinking. There could be a murderer on the loose. What are the odds that I would walk down the same street the murderer is? Pretty high probably. Doesn't make murder right. Just because something might not happen to you, doesn't make it right. Sure, that gay couple may not walk into the one business that doesn't cater to gay people, but what about another gay couple that does?

[Circled Square]

I see your point, but murder doesn't equal not selling a Gay guy a carton of eggs. Take your business elsewhere. I mentioned segregation actually, here's what I said:

like as a black man, even if say segregation came back, like say I couldn't enter business because they only serve _____...sure it's bad, yeah, but I'd rather live in a society that lets people have the choice. Basically I put the rights of others over my own.

Now I'm not a fan of say separate drinking fountains...but if we're talking about business, if they don't serve me, that's the choice they've made. I don't agree with it. I respect the fact they have the right to make the choice.

[EmperorWu]

It's one thing to be OK with it in theory. It's another to actually have to live it. I somehow doubt you'd be that ok with it if you had to live through what so many people had to live through, and in some places to some degree still have to. I'm all for individual rights, but that stops when those rights discriminate against other people. It's not just about refusing business from certain people, when you as a culture accept that's it's ok to discriminate it starts to go beyond just where you can buy shit. I guess it also matter of what constitutes a "right" can the KKK be allowed to refuse black members? Sure. Can a commercial business who probably receive incentives in some form or another from the federal government be allowed to refuse people? Probably not. It's the same reason why churches that receive tax breaks aren't supposed to push political campaigns. You say you put the rights of others above your own, yet you seem to give zero shits about the people who don't have equal rights. So where is your line? Whose rights supersede whom's? People have the right to discriminate, but they don't have the right to not be discriminated against? Considering things aren't equitable, is not the the measure of a free and just society how the people at the bottom of the totem pole fair? What is a right even? Since you support the rights of others. How are such metrics determined? Are laws not based on some proposed morality? Do you honestly not believe it is inherently immoral to discriminate against others? Certainly we are all empathic enough to put ourselves in another person's shoes and know if the way they are treated is right or wrong.

I'm tired, I hope that made some degree of sense. Also I didn't reread the topic so if you answered this stuff already forgive me. I'm also interested in discussing what allowing businesses to refuse someone service would entail and under what parameters it would function. But I'll leave that for another post.

[Circled Square]

Eh. That's the thing, the emotion card, it doesn't apply - it's sillyhearted. Childish. You will never live in a society without any of it, discrimination I mean. This to me is discrimination, but it's somebody's property, they own the business. You know damn well that for the most part this will be obscure shops, you won't see a McDonalds not serving Gay customers. I can't put myself in the shoes of the oppressed. Growing up I learned in history that Whites aren't "good", and by White teachers. I hate that mentality, that guilt. They never taught us in depth about how we were sold by our own people. Then on the flip side I saw MLK being praised as some sort of Saint, a black history month group, hell I know I'm going left and right here lol but there was a teacher who taught woodshop and he put his hand on a black kids shoulder and he get fired. Everybody told the principals it was horseshit on the guys part, and that the teacher was innocent. We once talked briefly about Affirmative Action, and you said it helped out White Women. Now is that 100% the program's fault? Are we putting a little halo above their heads again?

I don't want my mouth taped, so to speak. If I own a business, and WANTED (I wouldn't, it's stupid ofc) to not let a minority/LGBT person, I don't have to. I mean to put it simply, if a Jewish Catering service doesn't want to serve pork night lmao they don't have to. I'd be offended, but it's a lesson in life: non-violent protest is the best. You just walk away, dude. Don't support them, but don't harass them, or call them down to the dirt. They didn't hurt anybody. Unless this is another situation of: Your rights end, when my feelings begin.

[EmperorWu]

The emotional card absolutely applies. What percentage of laws have been applied due to political (see emotional, non corporate interest reasons, although those could be attributed to greed, which is a human characteristic, but that's irrelevant.) reasons? It's the reason why more religious states ban abortion for everyone, not just the people in their group. Or certain states ban marijuana use for everyone, not just the people in their groups. Let's not forget alcohol prohibition. So to say that a blanket ban stops on discrimination because it's an emotional issue is sillyhearted. It swings both ways, for good or bad, regardless of which side you stand on the political chessboard. I think it's childish to expect laws to follow solely logic, which is partially subjective as well. To expect that is illogical, you're completely disregarding that our societal constructs are human systems based as much, if not more, on emotion than rational thought.

This whole I was taught white people are the devil, I don't even know, that was a singular experience. Just how I was taught white people are basically the greatest thing to ever happen, and everyone is inferior, and they're better off with us (America, and whites, but I'm not that part of the us) forcing our will upon them. I saw kids called Nigger in school, I've seen kid harassed and mistreated all the time for not being white by teachers and students. This was not seen as a problem. No teachers got fired and no students got suspended. You were taught that MLK was a saint? I'm sure your aware of the issue where many school districts are trying to pretend guys like him didn't even exists. Black people selling black people, what does that matter in the scheme of our discussions? There has been a ton of stuff left out that would make white people look bad also, and America as a whole. How many white people in our history books have been whitewashed to look good? Although that's not just an issue of race but propaganda. So again all these things swings both ways, what's the point?

The program's fault? How is that a fault? I was just pointing out a misconception, a reality. Also whose head am I putting a halo above? Again it was just clearing up a misconception, it's a neutral statement. How that equates me putting a halo on something I don't know. I'm still not sure what this thing is I'm putting a halo on is.

Do rights to equality end where your feelings begin? You feel like black people or gays are bad so you should have the right to treat them as second class citizens? Again this swings both ways, if a black store refused white people service it'd be equally as unacceptable by that standard. Also protest is a principle this country stands on. If you're an asshole I can call you out. Does that constitute harassment? Did you not say earlier that as long as no one is getting killed it's basically fair game?