7 ms·
Daily stormer, pol, and breitbart are all free to find another web host/CDN or start their own. There is no slippery slope with one business refusing to do busi
by imbur 9y ago
Daily stormer, pol, and breitbart are all free to find another web host/CDN or start their own. There is no slippery slope with one business refusing to do business with another one. The business does not need to be accountable to anyone, because they have no requirement to host the daily stormer in the first place.
- jmnicolas 9y agoSo a baker could refuse to make a cake for homosexuals then ?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- darpa_escapee 9y agoWhat's with everyone bending over backwards to equate Nazis with non-genocidal, non-terrorist groups of people? Given the chance, gay people will try to live their lives in peace. Given the chance, Nazis will try to exterminate billions of people. Nazis haven't been systematically persecuted and killed for millennia. Ironically, gay people have been systematically persecuted and murdered by Nazis. Such persecution is why there are protected classes, which some governments recognize gay people as belonging to.
- ckastner 9y ago> What's with everyone bending over backwards to equivocate Nazis with non-genocidal, non-terrorist groups of people? That's not what is happening, as I understood it. The grandparent simply refuted the general argument that "The business does not need to be accountable to anyone" by providing a counterexample whereby unconditionally following this argument can lead to an unwanted outcome. In other words: it's not that simple.
- jmnicolas 9y agoThank you for explaining it better than I could (I'm not an English native speaker ;-).
- tchalla 9y agoActually, it is that simple. The grandparent made a false equivalence. Sexual orientation, color of skin, race etc. is not a choice that someone makes. Your political orientation is a choice you make. One of them is not the same as the other.
- ckastner 9y agoThe false equivalence is in the original argument ("accountable to anyone"), that's what the grandparent was attempting to point out.
- ygaf 9y agoThe equivalence the gp is making is between businesses, not clients. Businesses obviously are accountable to someone if they must serve gay people. It has already been pointed out that gays are a protected class, but deliberately(?) missing people's points has never helped a cause.
- Melchizedek 9y ago> Nazis will try to exterminate billions of people I have never, ever seen anyone argue for exterminating people (except as /b/-tier provocation). Not even the small group of people actually identifying as National Socialists do that, much less the numerous people the media would call "nazis". The straw man arguments are getting out of hand.
- Jimpulse 9y agoDo you have insight on what small groups of Nazis say or do? Even the groups at the Unite the Right rally called for ethnic cleansing of the USA. Which could be seen on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I
- Ygg2 9y agoLook. We only apply those rules for sides we like.
- jamespo 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group HTH
- ckastner 9y agoThen the argument should be "The business does not need to be accountable to anyone, except with regards to protected groups". However, that was not the argument that was made. The original argument is unconditional: "to anyone", period. The grandparent pointed out this flaw. You are on the same side of the argument.
- jamespo 9y agoI don't care about the original argument, it wasn't made by me. Obviously the business has to respect the law. Therefore comparing cloudflare and the bakery is dishonest, there you go.
- ckastner 9y ago> I don't care about the original argument Well, that explains why you still haven't realized that the comment you took offense with was actually concordant with your own position.
- drunkenmonkey 9y agoI think a big problem is that impoliteness and a lack of good faith exists within these online discussions.
- genon 9y agoYour link does not necessarily refute the post you're replying to. Gay people are not a protected group under Federal law; nor, AIUI, are they in most states.
- jamespo 9y ago
- tchalla 9y agoFalse equivalence. Your sexual orientation is not a choice. Your political orientation is.
- rayiner 9y agoReligion is a choice, but you can't refuse to bake a cake for Seventh Day Adventists.
- coldtea 9y ago>Your sexual orientation is not a choice. Who says it's so for everybody? There are millions who insist that their sex orientation is their choice. They can try X, experiment with Z, and whatever. That was part of the idea of "fluid genders" and sexual liberation in the sixties and especially seventies.
- denzil_correa 9y agoNo, people insist that they are free to have ANY sexual orientation. This doesn't make your sexual orientation "a choice".
- damnfine 9y agoIt is'nt always, but it sure can be.
- coldtea 9y agoWell, people have changed sexual orientation. Straight to gay, lesbian to bi, gay to transgender and vice versa. If that's not "a choice" I don't know what is. Just because it's not often a choice doesn't mean it can't be.
- mattcoles 9y agoIn the same way that some days I am happy and other days I'm sad, doesn't mean that my mood is choice.
- _khau 9y agoHomosexuals are the way they were born. Nazis are not.
- danieltillett 9y agoActually nobody knows why homosexuals are homosexual nor why Nazis are Nazis. There is very little scientific evidence to support any cause for either outlook.
- ionised 9y agoAre you implying homosexuality is a choice?
- danieltillett 9y agoNo I am saying we don't know why.
- thehardsphere 9y agoIf the cake is denied because the baker doesn't want to create content they disagree with (as opposed to being denied merely because the requestor is homosexual), then why not?
- sageikosa 9y agobusiness is accountable via money to its owners and creditors. which ultimately means its accountable to the market.