3 ms·

Seems like a matter of consistency more than anything. Google has already decided to make an app store that excludes things like overt racism. Seems like if you

by qntty 8y ago

Seems like a matter of consistency more than anything. Google has already decided to make an app store that excludes things like overt racism. Seems like if you're going to exclude racism you should also exclude homophobia. Whether we should tolerate both these people is an interesting question, but not the issue in this case.

kieckerjan 8y ago
Hmm, not sure if that logic flies. There are many people who hold the view that race (whatever that may be) is innate while homosexuality is not. They would argue that the latter can be “cured” while the former cannot. From that perspective the distinction makes sense. (I do not subscribe to that view at all, btw.)
- qntty 8y ago
  Yes, these people are wrong. We must be able to make judgements of fact to make good decisions about these things.
  - bargl 8y ago
    As soon as you say wrong, you start sounding like the people running these churches. I am ok with people being wrong, that's why we have freedoms. It's society's job to pressure churches and other organizations to turn away from these dangerous beliefs. Not the governments. That's part of why I fight for freedoms like this. Wrong is subjective, the objective truth of wrong comes from society. If you allow governments to determine what is "wrong" we would have never gotten to the point that we are having these conversations. Some of our beliefs will be wrong to a future generation, by allowing them the freedom to change them through societal pressure we allow society to grow without creating the friction of civil unrest to grow from that vector.
    - qntty 8y ago
      Who's talking about the government? This is about Google. I'm talking about being factually wrong, not morally wrong.
      - bargl 8y ago
        >Who's talking about the government? This is about Google. True. > I'm talking about being factually wrong, not morally wrong. True. I was taking things out of context. I don't love how much power these companies have with their app stores. I'll be interested to see how regulation of these falls out and whether or not that regulation makes them more open or closed. (this was my thinking when I mentioned the government above).

by qntty 8y ago

kieckerjan 8y ago

Hmm, not sure if that logic flies. There are many people who hold the view that race (whatever that may be) is innate while homosexuality is not. They would argue that the latter can be “cured” while the former cannot. From that perspective the distinction makes sense. (I do not subscribe to that view at all, btw.)

qntty 8y ago
Yes, these people are wrong. We must be able to make judgements of fact to make good decisions about these things.
- bargl 8y ago
  As soon as you say wrong, you start sounding like the people running these churches. I am ok with people being wrong, that's why we have freedoms. It's society's job to pressure churches and other organizations to turn away from these dangerous beliefs. Not the governments. That's part of why I fight for freedoms like this. Wrong is subjective, the objective truth of wrong comes from society. If you allow governments to determine what is "wrong" we would have never gotten to the point that we are having these conversations. Some of our beliefs will be wrong to a future generation, by allowing them the freedom to change them through societal pressure we allow society to grow without creating the friction of civil unrest to grow from that vector.
  - qntty 8y ago
    Who's talking about the government? This is about Google. I'm talking about being factually wrong, not morally wrong.
    - bargl 8y ago
      >Who's talking about the government? This is about Google. True. > I'm talking about being factually wrong, not morally wrong. True. I was taking things out of context. I don't love how much power these companies have with their app stores. I'll be interested to see how regulation of these falls out and whether or not that regulation makes them more open or closed. (this was my thinking when I mentioned the government above).