4 ms·
LGBT is a protected class, just like race. The desire to have Muhammad drawn isn’t protected in anyway, so it’s not at all equivalent.
by ec109685 3y ago
LGBT is a protected class, just like race. The desire to have Muhammad drawn isn’t protected in anyway, so it’s not at all equivalent.
- jaywalk 3y agoWhat you're saying is nonsense. How is the desire to have something drawn for you all that different from the desire to have a website created for you? It's essentially the same.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 49531 3y agoBecause producing an image of Muhammad is an explicit prohibition in Islam. Providing services to same-sex couples is not a prohibition in Christianity.
- tivert 3y ago> Because producing an image of Muhammad is an explicit prohibition in Islam. Providing services to same-sex couples is not a prohibition in Christianity. Is a distinction like that even relevant? I don't think the US court system is going to wade into determining who is correctly practicing their religion or not. That itself would be a glaring First Amendment violation.
- za3faran 3y agoWe Muslims cannot draw or make statues of any prophet or messenger as well, and anything with a soul as well.
- paulddraper 3y agoDid you completely miss the part > Ms. Smith is “willing to work with all people regardless of classifications such as race, creed, sexual orientation, and gender.” To your credit, it appears you are far from alone in missing this. No less than a Supreme Court Justices apparently missed this fact: "Today is a sad day in American constitutional law and in the lives of LGBT people. The Supreme Court of the United States declares that a particular kind of business, though open to the public, has a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. The Court does so for the first time in its history." - Justice Sotomayor :/
- jaywalk 3y agoPar for the course with Sotomayor.
- ec109685 3y agoShe refuses to offer the same website creation services for gay couples. So she is not willing to work with anyone on their websites.
- KMag 3y agoI believe the point is that she would also refuse to create a same-sex wedding site for a hetero customer and would be willing to make a hetero wedding site for a same-sex customer. It's a subtle but important distinction. Of course, it gets very messy because in the case of wedding sites, the correlation between content and customer is 0.999999999.
- paulddraper 3y agoYou mistake the product for the customer. She will make straight websites for gay customers. And she won't make gay websites for straight customers. It is the content of the request, not the sexual orientation of the requester. If you were a freelance developer, would there be projects that you would be morally opposed to working on?
- ec109685 3y agoI would never discriminate my output based on race, religion or orientation.
- noduerme 3y agoWhat if someone asked you to do a website for a Christian group that wanted to ban homosexuality?
- ec109685 3y agoThat’s a good point. If I was creating something out of whole cloth, I wouldn’t want to do it. However if it was required by law in order for wedding designers not to discriminate for racial or sexual orientation, I’d do it. And the case in this situation was different where it was more like a service: “It only insists that once Smith has designed a wedding website, she must allow same-sex couples to purchase that product. In essence, Colorado says she must sell her website template to all customers, regardless of their identity. She need not create a new template or “speak” in support of any marriage.” What’s scary is the precedence the decision sets: “A bakery whose owner opposed mixed-race relationships could refuse to bake wedding cakes for interracial couples; a real estate agency whose owner opposed racial integration could refuse to represent Black couples seeking to purchase a home in a predominantly white neighborhood; or a portrait studio whose proprietor opposes interracial adoption could refuse to take pictures of white parents with their Black adopted children.”