4 ms·

This was essentially the same issue with the gay wedding cake. For the betterment of society, I think we might need an amendment that prevents discrimination b

This was essentially the same issue with the gay wedding cake. For the betterment of society, I think we might need an amendment that prevents discrimination based on political opinions. Otherwise, two parallel societies of echo chambers will form, and that is not a good thing.

rapsey 6y ago
A bakery is not a social network.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  The example used was a bar. For many people, saying “Just go to a different bakery that will bake you a gay wedding cake” was an unacceptable solution. Many of those people, I might add, are now using the same argument themselves.
- Nullabillity 6y ago
  True, bakeries are much more fungible than social networks.
jjgreen 6y ago
The cake case found that it was not discrimination [1]. This was supported by many LGB+ activists since it would have implied that gay bakeries would then be required to make Nazi cakes. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-court-backs-bakery-that-refused-to-make-gay-wedding-cake https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-c...
- cheph 6y ago
  > “The bakers could not refuse to supply their goods to Mr Lee because he was a gay man or supported gay marriage, but that is quite different from obliging them to supply a cake iced with a message with which they profoundly disagreed.” He would not have made that cake for anyone. Twitter on the other hand has no problem carrying much more egregious messages than Trumps, just not for Trump. So not really comparable.
  - eppp 6y ago
    I think we can all agree that shouting into an empty field in Nebraska is quite different than grabbing a bullhorn in front of a crowd and encouraging them to attack people. Twitter is no different. Or if you like the fire analogy, shouting fire while you are by yourself is quite a bit different than doing it in a movie theater.
    - cheph 6y ago
      > grabbing a bullhorn in front of a crowd and encouraging them to attack people. This is not why Twitter banned Trump: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio... So not sure what the relevance is. But I guess it is not less relevant than the example of the baker.
chr1 6y ago
In a way it's similar, because people with different viewpoints have to live together, and therefore any economic supply chain has to go through ideological boundaries multiple times. If people go full on economic sanctions war, trying to not sell or to not buy from people with wrong ideologies, everyone can become worse off. So not allowing economic warfare is a useful guideline for societies who want to resolve their fights in a civilized manner. Maybe it should be something like: if you are required to do additional custom work specifically for each customer, then you can choose which work to do. But if you are providing the same service to everyone, and you have to do additional work to filter out some types of customers, then you are doing something harmful to society.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  Maybe it should be something like: if you are required to do additional custom work specifically for each customer, then you can choose which work to do. But if you are providing the same service to everyone, and you have to do additional work to filter out some types of customers, then you are doing something harmful to society. I came to a similar conclusion myself. I think that’s probably the way to go. You don’t want to force anyone to do something against their beliefs, but you also want to ensure that society and the market are unified.

rapsey 6y ago

A bakery is not a social network.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
The example used was a bar. For many people, saying “Just go to a different bakery that will bake you a gay wedding cake” was an unacceptable solution. Many of those people, I might add, are now using the same argument themselves.
Nullabillity 6y ago
True, bakeries are much more fungible than social networks.

jjgreen 6y ago

The cake case found that it was not discrimination [1]. This was supported by many LGB+ activists since it would have implied that gay bakeries would then be required to make Nazi cakes. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-court-backs-bakery-that-refused-to-make-gay-wedding-cake https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-c...

cheph 6y ago
> “The bakers could not refuse to supply their goods to Mr Lee because he was a gay man or supported gay marriage, but that is quite different from obliging them to supply a cake iced with a message with which they profoundly disagreed.” He would not have made that cake for anyone. Twitter on the other hand has no problem carrying much more egregious messages than Trumps, just not for Trump. So not really comparable.
- eppp 6y ago
  I think we can all agree that shouting into an empty field in Nebraska is quite different than grabbing a bullhorn in front of a crowd and encouraging them to attack people. Twitter is no different. Or if you like the fire analogy, shouting fire while you are by yourself is quite a bit different than doing it in a movie theater.
  - cheph 6y ago
    > grabbing a bullhorn in front of a crowd and encouraging them to attack people. This is not why Twitter banned Trump: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio... So not sure what the relevance is. But I guess it is not less relevant than the example of the baker.

chr1 6y ago

In a way it's similar, because people with different viewpoints have to live together, and therefore any economic supply chain has to go through ideological boundaries multiple times. If people go full on economic sanctions war, trying to not sell or to not buy from people with wrong ideologies, everyone can become worse off. So not allowing economic warfare is a useful guideline for societies who want to resolve their fights in a civilized manner. Maybe it should be something like: if you are required to do additional custom work specifically for each customer, then you can choose which work to do. But if you are providing the same service to everyone, and you have to do additional work to filter out some types of customers, then you are doing something harmful to society.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
Maybe it should be something like: if you are required to do additional custom work specifically for each customer, then you can choose which work to do. But if you are providing the same service to everyone, and you have to do additional work to filter out some types of customers, then you are doing something harmful to society. I came to a similar conclusion myself. I think that’s probably the way to go. You don’t want to force anyone to do something against their beliefs, but you also want to ensure that society and the market are unified.