I agree that you have a choice, but would you discriminate against someone because of the color of their skin? Would you refuse to rent an apartment to someone because they are of a certain religion or creed? You certainly could refuse service to someone because they are Muslim or Wiccan, but that kind of goes against the foundations of our country.
The rights of people, regardless of race, creed or color, is a fundamental principle of our our democracy. I would add "or sexual orientation."
I think that alcoholism is currently considered a disease. But then, I suppose it's only a matter of time before we discover the alcoholism gene.
There's a difference between what's decent and what's legal.
There's plenty of business people who refuse to work with Muslims (I'd argue that's an indecent and il-informed decision ---- but it's perfectly legal). There's certainly organizations who still discriminate on skin color. I 'm sure there's still landlords who discriminate on religion (they limit their advertisement to churches, etc).
Perhaps that's not consistent with "American values...." --- but I'd say that America values freedom.
There's business guides for christian friendly businesses (Shepherd's guide) , business guides for gay-friendly companies, and business guides for Muslim-friendly establishments. All of these guides "discriminate" indirectly.
Coming from a fairly long long of alcoholics (most in family that was only recently found), I'm convinced there is an alcoholic gene.
While I might question the morality of someone who discriminates actively, I have a hard time asking government to get involved.
It's an ethical, not a legal issue.
American government has enough distractions to deal with, as it is.
SS109 wrote: Like I said, I do support Gay marriage but I would be against requiring a church to allow gay marriages on thier property. I would also be against requiring businesses to provide services for a same sex couple.
I'm confused. Why would you be against requiring businesses to provide services to gay couples? Wouldn't that be discrimination based on sexual orientation?
I agree that churches should not be required to allow gay marriages. That's a religious decision on the church's part.
The case I am talking about, a Lesbian couple asked a photographer to record their ceremony, he declined and they wanted to charge him with violating their rights. First why force someone to be your photgrapher, think he is going to do his best at your event? But I think business should be allowed to refuse customers in certain cases.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
SS109 wrote: Like I said, I do support Gay marriage but I would be against requiring a church to allow gay marriages on thier property. I would also be against requiring businesses to provide services for a same sex couple.
I'm confused. Why would you be against requiring businesses to provide services to gay couples? Wouldn't that be discrimination based on sexual orientation?
I agree that churches should not be required to allow gay marriages. That's a religious decision on the church's part.
The case I am talking about, a Lesbian couple asked a photographer to record their ceremony, he declined and they wanted to charge him with violating their rights. First why force someone to be your photgrapher, think he is going to do his best at your event? But I think business should be allowed to refuse customers in certain cases.
How would you decide which were the "certain" cases.....who would make that distinction? We would be right back to blacks being denied a seat on the bus or at the lunch counter based upon their race......or gays denied jobs because of their sexual orientation. I see no sense in giving up the gains we have made in this country towards equality for all citizens. If we allow people to make that decision for their own business.....it will spread to any business, then what? Back to square one with equal rights under the law.