For me the difference is in refusing to serve someone because how they were born vs the choices they make.
Totally ok with the later, but the laws are supposed to prevent the former. Just like it being illegal to discriminate against someone just because they are black or white or Asian or whatever.
I agree with you. Isn’t race specifically a protected class with the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendment specifically? Political ideology or beliefs are not protected, unless violence is utilized. Please correct me if I am wrong.
For employment purposes, it is. Court precedents have affirmed that discriminating against someone based on sexual orientation is a form of sex-based discrimination which is illegal under Title VII.
But creative works (like baking a cake or building a website) are protected by the constitution as free speech. You can’t compel someone to perform a creative work against their own beliefs.
That’s why you’re allowed to refuse to build a website for a gay couples wedding, but you can’t refuse to change their tyres.
That’s great and all, but I personally don’t think that is right for fair.
Imagine a baker saying they don’t want to bake a wedding cake because of an interracial couple or for black people. I get the law is different, I’m saying personally I don’t agree with that law and think that’s a load of shit.
The problem is you’re wrong though, because legally you have to look at the lowest common denominator.
Imagine you are a baker and someone wants you to bake a nazi cake? Would you want to? Hell no, but saying that a producer is required by law to perform any creative production asked of by the client means that you as a Jewish gay person (hypothetically) would be forced to bake that nazi cake.
Similarly, it doesn’t really matter what’s “right” it doesn’t change that for some people, lgbt issues are considered religious sin, and they feel like they would be committing a religious sin in baking a pride cake. Now are they loony? Yeah they are. But it doesn’t change that you cannot force someone to artistically create something against their will. ESPECIALLY when you can just go to another baker who will.
The problem is that while it is obvious to you that sexual orientation is a matter of birth and not choice, it isn’t to, to be honest, the vast majority of people on this planet.
And also, just to put things in perspective, even the science isn’t fully convinced. Most evidence tells us it’s something from birth, and my personal life anecdote tells me I’m bisexual since the day I was born, but truthfully we don’t have any hard evidence to prove it, since it is nearly impossible to prove.
The color of the skin might be something you are “born as”, but as Michael Jackson proved you can certainly change it. Does it mean it is a choice, and not “something that you are”? What happens once CRISPR becomes commonplace?
The problem is that while it is obvious to you that sexual orientation is a matter of birth and not choice, it isn’t to, to be honest, the vast majority of people on this planet.
And also, just to put things in perspective, even the science isn’t fully convinced. Most evidence tells us it’s something from birth, and my personal life anecdote tells me I’m bisexual since the day I was born, but truthfully we don’t have any hard evidence to prove it, since it is nearly impossible to prove.
It’s a fine line, but it comes down to this: it’s not OK for the baker to refuse to bake a cake for someone in a protected class.
However, it’s also not OK for someone in a protected class to compel speech from the baker.
Ask the baker to bake a plain cake with no messaging on it: the baker can’t refuse on the basis of any protected attributes, like the customer’s race, etc.
Ask the baker to decorate the cake with a “happy pride day” message? Only if the baker agrees to that expression. You can’t compel speech.
It works the other way too: you can’t compel the baker to write something they disagree with if they don’t want to. It’s clear why a baker would be within their rights to refuse a “I’m glad all the Jews died” message on the cake. The baker is within their rights to decline any expression they don’t like. And that’s the way it should be.
I think you mean for a hypothetical website that was never ordered and certainly never order by the straight man the website sited. The court just ruled on two cases that were effectively made up. As the loan company also didn’t have any issue with debt forgiveness, and the state “filed for them” to “create” an injured party. it is past time to pit enough people on the bench that One president can’t fuck the legal system up for 6 peoples lifetimes.
It’s the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects from discrimination from any of the following: race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Basically anything else is fair game, as far as I understand.
A lot of the people who discriminate against the lgbtq+ community absolutely believe that sexual orientation is a choice, and I’d wager that includes the justices who ruled in favor of the web designer.
Tattoos are a choice, would you be denied services because you have a tattoo? Or I don’t serve women wearing pants, because I think they should only wear dresses.
Obviously I disagree, but I also want to point out that many conservatives think being gay or trans is a choice.
And they’d be wrong. Being gay is a choice as much as being straight is.
I’m always quick to point out if someone believes being gay is a choice, they are admitting THEY actively are choosing not to be gay everyday… that they actually could find the same sex attractive but choose not to.
[A hooded figure in black robes, and no face visible save for large, pure red eyes is speaking a room made of stone. The hooded figure speaks in white text bubbles to another character outside of the frame, who responds with black text bubbles]
Hooded figure: So… There’s no karma?
Black text bubble: Ye-
Hooded figure: No greedy CEO?
Black text bubble: Yep.
Panel 2
[The out of frame character speaking in black text bubbles is now shown to be a second hooded figure with round red eyes, standing next to hooded figure 1 in the stone room. Hooded figure 1 has a hand outstretched as they speak, while hooded figure 2 is giving them a thumbs up in response. There is a small fire burning on an altar in the background.]
Hooded figure 1: All ad free?
Hooded figure 2: Oh yeah.
Panel 3
[Hooded figure 1 is shown in close up again, pointing a finger to their left, with their eyes wide in a look of surprise]
Hooded figure 1: But why is the logo a-
Panel 4
[Both hooded figure 1 and hooded figure 2 are shown standing on opposite sides of a large drawing of the fediverse icon on the floor, a rainbow pentagram. There is a pure white, slightly transparent glowing figure with wide eyes standing in the centre of the pentagram, their arms outstretched. There is a small white ball on top of an antenna on top of the glowing figure’s head, with a beam of white light shining from their head to the ceiling. Squiggles of white energy and red streaks of fire fill the room, emanating from the glowing figure. Hooded figure 1 has their arm slightly raised, as if to shield themselves from the energy in the room]
Hooded figure 1: Pentagram?
Hooded figure 2: Reasons.
^I’m a human volunteer transcribing posts in a format compatible with screen readers, for blind and visually impaired users!^
The alternatives have looked nice, but overall I keep coming back to Jerboa as it has had less bugs for my experience. But I also get automated updates via F-Droid and previous versions have been buggy.
I am one of those people who migrated as I grew up with an internet that was full of small communities and interesting content uncontrolled by greedy corporations. When I found Reddit back in 2012, I thought it was amazing and going to be a bastion of information for a modern internet. Well, now we know that wasn’t the case thanks to chasing the almighty dollar. Hopefully this is the point in time where we can steer this ship around and bring the control back to the users.
I share your opinion. I’m optimistic about the migrations away from twitter, reddit, and facebook. This is a great opportunity for the improvement and democratization of social networks. The more that people move to open source platforms and the more that people demand control of their data, the better!
That’s not new, they add this a few years ago after changing “gilded” to multi-tier award, which cost spez-buck, which you can get from either buying it like pay2win game or get this premium, and they will give you some spez-buck each month.
What infuriate me more is they didn’t have regional pricing, so reddit premium cost more than youtube premium in my country, which provide better content and all of what i subbed is OG content.
I can’t find myself paying monthly for internet regurgitator.
Reddit is so much an American business - screw that. But it’s not even doing a proper business model - screwing the stupid Yanks and giving a better deal to people who don’t feel the need to ‘pay more for quality’.
You know, I bought a HP printer which takes HP cartridges which print out (officially) 1500 pages each, and they cost the equivalent of $8 - but only outside the USA… as an answer (I think) to well organised resistance to the ‘maybe 300 pages or less’ leading to people buying modified ink-tank cartridges locally made (in Thailand).
My last cartridge (not heavily used) lasted for 5 years before being replaced… so HP gets my money with a smile.
lemmy.world
Active