3 ms·
Twitter is a very public platform -- you said so yourself in your previous comment. If we're willing to force a religious baker to provide services for a group
by nitrogen 5y ago
Twitter is a very public platform -- you said so yourself in your previous comment. If we're willing to force a religious baker to provide services for a group they find abhorrent (however misguided they are about that), why aren't we also willing to force a much more consequential service provider to provide services for a group they find abhorrent (however right or wrong they are about that)?
- threatofrain 5y agoFor the US baking case, the decided case law is that religious businesses are free to discriminate against gay people. Also, for religious places of employment, it is already a Constitutional right to fire priests for homosexuality, or to expel homosexual students from a religious school. It is also religiously critical for religious institutions to be able to engage in religious discrimination; lest we ask whether we may have a Jewish pope lead the Catholic church. We can discuss what ought to be all day, but I don't see the winds shifting anytime soon. We mind as well also discuss whether the world should be united, or... it would be a better expenditure of energy to discuss the oughts which we can actually do something about.