Guilt by Secondary Association

[jon-nyc]

Political viewpoint isn’t a protected class.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

@jon-nyc said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

I don’t think she does have a case but it sucks all the same.

To deny service because of one's political views?

To deny service to the SPOUSE?

Is this different from refusing to bake a gay wedding cake?

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

Is this different from refusing to bake a gay wedding cake?

If not providing services because of religious belief, then, no.

But I don't think the Church of No Conservatives will fly.

[Copper]

Sure, you can ban someone because you don't like their opinion

You can ban Biden voters

You can ban people because you think their group is a hate group

Now the hate group should seek protected group status

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

Is this different from refusing to bake a gay wedding cake?

If not providing services because of religious belief, then, no.

But I don't think the Church of No Conservatives will fly.

Yeah, religion is a constitutionally protected excuse to act like a douchebag, politics apparently not. Which is kind of ironic if you think about it.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

Yeah, religion is a constitutionally protected excuse to act like a douchebag, politics apparently not. Which is kind of ironic if you think about it.

The secular hospital where I used to work made accommodations for anesthesia providers to refuse to provide anesthesia for abortions.

Should they be compelled?

[LuFins Dad]

Discrimination over political affiliation IS allowed. It's stupid as all get out, but it is legal.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

Yeah, religion is a constitutionally protected excuse to act like a douchebag, politics apparently not. Which is kind of ironic if you think about it.

The secular hospital where I used to work made accommodations for anesthesia providers to refuse to provide anesthesia for abortions.

Should they be compelled?

I'm all for people doing what they feel comfortable doing, so no, they shouldn't be compelled. I actually think the cake maker should be allowed to refuse service, and I also think the people buying the cake have every right to protest outside their shop.

As far as Michelle Malkin goes, I'm a little surprised she doesn't stay in fancy hotels when she's on business trips. I personally wouldn't refuse her service, but I think they have the right to if they wish. And she has the right to complain about it.

The fact that any of this shit is allowed doesn't mean it's necessarily a good thing. I'd be a lot happier without all the toxicity.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes what about her husband. He has committed no thoughtcrime, has he?

Perhaps he should just build his own hotels.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

I also think the people buying the cake have every right to protest outside their shop.

And to sue?

[Jolly]

https://www.dor.ca.gov/Home/UnruhCivilRightsAct

[George K]

@jolly said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

https://www.dor.ca.gov/Home/UnruhCivilRightsAct

protection from discrimination by all business establishments in California, including housing and public accommodations, because of age, ancestry, color, disability, national origin, race, religion, sex and sexual orientation.

So, in California, I can exclude Antifa.

Good.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

@doctor-phibes said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

I also think the people buying the cake have every right to protest outside their shop.

And to sue?

You have every right to sue. Doesn't mean you'll win, does it?

[Jolly]

You also have the right to drool in public.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

@doctor-phibes what about her husband. He has committed no thoughtcrime, has he?

Perhaps he should just build his own hotels.

I said I didn't agree with any of it, but according to Liberty Central, people should be able to choose who they do business with. That piece of wisdom cuts both ways.

That means people can get fucked for no reason at all. It's the price of Freedom, or as we say around here 'At Will Employment'. It actually says in my job offer that I can be let go for no reason whatsover.

[Doctor Phibes]

@jolly said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

You also have the right to drool in public.

That's the point I've been making. If you want people to be able to refuse to serve others because of their beliefs, that freedom still applies when you think their beliefs are stoopid.

Any idiot can defend people he agrees with. It's having to defend the other ones where people start asking whether liberty is such a great idea.

[Jolly]

I think blacklisting a person because of those stated in the opening story is asinine.

[Doctor Phibes]

@jolly said in Guilt by Secondary Association:

I think blacklisting a person because of those stated in the opening story is asinine.

So do I. But that's what Freedom is all about. I also think refusing to cater gay weddings is asinine.

If you want it to stop, you might need some government interference. Again, that would cut both ways, so the bakers might find themselves forced to sell cakes.

Alternatively, just let the market take care of it.