11 ms·

What about anti-discrimnation laws? Where do you stand on the issue with the baker refusing to bake a cake for the gay couple?

nvahalik 6y ago
Would also love to hear the answer to this question. You can’t have it both ways.
- barry-cotter 6y ago
  Of course you can. One rule for me another for you because I think these two things are different is easily understood by two year olds. Lawyers are perfectly capable of coming up with justifications for anything they like and if the judges feel sympathetic the power of the state will enforce it.
Klinky 6y ago
Sexuality is getting closer and closer to being a fully-protected class, so they are going to have to suck it up, just like the bakers who didn't want to serve black people decades ago. They can deny service to anyone, so long as it does not run afoul of discrimination laws. ICE is not a protected class.
PascLeRasc 6y ago
No one is born an ICE employee.
- umvi 6y ago
  Whether you are "born gay" is up for debate as well. There are many instances of people "changing their minds" on their sexuality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Spacey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Spacey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Dodson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Dodson
  - afiori 6y ago
    I vouched for this comment for a very specific reason: Civil rights of for the LGBT should not predicated on "being born that way", they should be predicated on the fact that it is an acceptable and dignified way to be human.
  - rdgthree 6y ago
    I think this comment is reasonable if they're simply saying that it's plausibly true that not everyone who is gay is born gay - some choose to live their life that way, others are born that way. I think this is a fair read on sexuality especially given the "spectrum" understanding of sexual preferences. If you're born 50% interested in men and 50% interested in women, you can very well choose to live your life (and identify) as a straight person or a gay person (or a bisexual person!). That doesn't mean that others aren't born with a 0/100 ratio (one way or the other), though.
jobeirne 6y ago
In societies that have full respect for private property, I should be able to refuse to do business with you for any reason, including the color of your shoes, the kind of music you listen to, or your marital preferences. Whether it is wise or rationally self-interested to do so is a different question.
- the-dude 6y ago
  You are carefully tiptoeing around race & gender here.
  - jobeirne 6y ago
    Nope - in free societies you should be able to refuse service on any grounds, including those things. Otherwise you're permitting the government to forcibly compel you to allocate your time and resources to ends they define. In free societies, governments should only be able to forcibly compel people not to do things (murder, threaten, steal, etc.) - see the concept of "negative rights."
    - VBprogrammer 6y ago
      I mean this in the nicest possible way; have you ever faced discrimination based on the colour of your skin, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities or anything else which is protected by law in most civilised countries? If, like a significant portion of the HN audience, you are straight, white, middle class and male it's probably easier for you to dismiss the right to fair treatment than it might be for individuals in those categories.
      - kuzimoto 6y ago
        I don't agree with discrimination, and would never seek to engage in that myself. With that being said, in the private sector, there really is no "right to fair treatment" with exceptions for anything required by law for affirmative action. By forcing fairness (where a business must provide service to someone it doesn't want to), you are simultaneously removing the freedom of association [0]. [0] While not explicitly stated in the US constitution is argued to be a fundamental human right.
woodruffw 6y ago
Being an immigration cop is not a protected class, and shouldn't be.
gruez 6y ago
Simple: anti-discrimination laws only apply if you're being discriminated on the basis of being in a protected class. being gay is a protected class. Being ICE isn't.
- empthought 6y ago
  In some jurisdictions being gay is a protected class, in others it is not. Even the USSC ruling today doesn’t create a new protected class; it simply (and correctly) determines that discrimination based on gender nonconformity (whether sexual orientation, gender identity, or other) is discrimination based on sex, which is already a protected class.

nvahalik 6y ago

Would also love to hear the answer to this question. You can’t have it both ways.

barry-cotter 6y ago
Of course you can. One rule for me another for you because I think these two things are different is easily understood by two year olds. Lawyers are perfectly capable of coming up with justifications for anything they like and if the judges feel sympathetic the power of the state will enforce it.

Klinky 6y ago

Sexuality is getting closer and closer to being a fully-protected class, so they are going to have to suck it up, just like the bakers who didn't want to serve black people decades ago. They can deny service to anyone, so long as it does not run afoul of discrimination laws. ICE is not a protected class.

PascLeRasc 6y ago

No one is born an ICE employee.

umvi 6y ago
Whether you are "born gay" is up for debate as well. There are many instances of people "changing their minds" on their sexuality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Spacey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Spacey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Dodson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Dodson
- afiori 6y ago
  I vouched for this comment for a very specific reason: Civil rights of for the LGBT should not predicated on "being born that way", they should be predicated on the fact that it is an acceptable and dignified way to be human.
- rdgthree 6y ago
  I think this comment is reasonable if they're simply saying that it's plausibly true that not everyone who is gay is born gay - some choose to live their life that way, others are born that way. I think this is a fair read on sexuality especially given the "spectrum" understanding of sexual preferences. If you're born 50% interested in men and 50% interested in women, you can very well choose to live your life (and identify) as a straight person or a gay person (or a bisexual person!). That doesn't mean that others aren't born with a 0/100 ratio (one way or the other), though.

jobeirne 6y ago

In societies that have full respect for private property, I should be able to refuse to do business with you for any reason, including the color of your shoes, the kind of music you listen to, or your marital preferences. Whether it is wise or rationally self-interested to do so is a different question.

the-dude 6y ago
You are carefully tiptoeing around race & gender here.
- jobeirne 6y ago
  Nope - in free societies you should be able to refuse service on any grounds, including those things. Otherwise you're permitting the government to forcibly compel you to allocate your time and resources to ends they define. In free societies, governments should only be able to forcibly compel people not to do things (murder, threaten, steal, etc.) - see the concept of "negative rights."
  - VBprogrammer 6y ago
    I mean this in the nicest possible way; have you ever faced discrimination based on the colour of your skin, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities or anything else which is protected by law in most civilised countries? If, like a significant portion of the HN audience, you are straight, white, middle class and male it's probably easier for you to dismiss the right to fair treatment than it might be for individuals in those categories.
    - kuzimoto 6y ago
      I don't agree with discrimination, and would never seek to engage in that myself. With that being said, in the private sector, there really is no "right to fair treatment" with exceptions for anything required by law for affirmative action. By forcing fairness (where a business must provide service to someone it doesn't want to), you are simultaneously removing the freedom of association [0]. [0] While not explicitly stated in the US constitution is argued to be a fundamental human right.

woodruffw 6y ago

Being an immigration cop is not a protected class, and shouldn't be.

gruez 6y ago

Simple: anti-discrimination laws only apply if you're being discriminated on the basis of being in a protected class. being gay is a protected class. Being ICE isn't.

empthought 6y ago
In some jurisdictions being gay is a protected class, in others it is not. Even the USSC ruling today doesn’t create a new protected class; it simply (and correctly) determines that discrimination based on gender nonconformity (whether sexual orientation, gender identity, or other) is discrimination based on sex, which is already a protected class.