4 ms·
I think the crucial difference is that nobody was disadvantaged by legalizing same-sex marriage. At least in how it was implemented in the UK, religious venues
by grajam_hons 4y ago
I think the crucial difference is that nobody was disadvantaged by legalizing same-sex marriage. At least in how it was implemented in the UK, religious venues are not compelled to officiate such marriages. So the LGB folks still get to enjoy marriage equality, but the reverends and imams and suchlike don't feel disrespected.
- sumeno 4y agoWho is disadvantaged by using someone's preferred pronouns? or not using racist slurs?
- grajam_hons 4y agoI was thinking more along the lines of how women's rights are affected, for instance. What's recently been happening to women in prisons quite exemplifies the issue.
- grajam_hons 4y ago[flagged]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- UncleMeat 4y agoConservatives have complained bitterly that legalizing same-sex marriage disadvantaged people. You've got clerks who say it violates their rights. You've got people who say that it devalues their own straight marriages.
- grajam_hons 4y agoSome clerks have claimed that, but that's akin to a vegetarian working in a butcher's shop and complaining that they have to handle meat. If the job description changes such that conflicts with your religious beliefs then you do have a choice to resign, or, ideally, be made redundant and given redundancy pay to tide you over until finding a more suitable job.
- UncleMeat 4y agoOf course, but the point is that “gay rights and trans rights are distinct because trans rights disadvantage people” isn’t something that everybody agrees on. We shouldn’t let the fact that pronouns aggravate some people create toxic environments for trans people.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- grajam_hons 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]