a reply to: TheRedneck
We seem to agree strongly on some things but disagree strongly on others.
Some have tried to make a connection to the bakery owner in Colorado refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding or the print shop refusing to
create artwork for a gay wedding. Those were owners refusing, not clerks.
Doesn't this simply mean that the only people who are actually "free" to actually live their life to their beliefs are rich business owners (i.e.
usually the ruling class)? This is the capitalist approach. Note that I appreciate that not all business owners are rich and that private contractors
are a thing. However, usually business owners are at least upper middle-class and private contractors cannot be universally relied upon.
There seem to be two main alternatives here:
1. Have the owners and employees both be forced to serve customers against their beliefs. This means that the customer is the most free and has the
most choice. However, owners and employees do not have choice to live according to their beliefs without quitting, plus if a customer is denied
service they can usually simply go to a different store, whereas changing employer (for employees) is harder, and changing industry (for employers) is
even harder. There's also the question of enforcement, some form of regulatory body would have to exist probably from the state, which ideally should
be democratic. We could also make distinctions about whether discriminating against someone because of who they are (race, gender, sexuality, gender
identity) versus what they believe (political ideology, religion) or what they are wearing is acceptable under law.
2. Both capitalism and the state are unjust power structures that oppress. All transactions and decision making should be between the two people in
the store at that specific time. This takes the owners out of the equation, they aren't even the ones doing the work in this case, and in this world
there wouldn't even be owners exploiting labour. This is a different implementation of socialism. Of course, at this point in time I think this would
yield chaos and there's a question of how we would get there in the first place.
All three are imperfect.
One system which could complement some of these approaches, would be a way to report and boycott Capitalists who refuse service for any reason. This
could give additional choice to customers who wish to avoid supporting those who oppress others. This would make one hell of an Android App, but I
suppose that's what Zomato and reviews on Google (sort-of) do. This should be done more I think.
I think mainly people should be brought up and raised to respect other people, even if it means sacrifices here and there. I advocate avoiding
teaching our adolescents any oppressive belief systems (noting that I cannot enforce this, because I strongly think that children/adolescents are not
the property of either the parents, the state, nor me, nor god, they belong to themselves and we owe that to them), but it could be a good idea to
teach them about the pitfalls of every approach and the so called paradox of tolerance
In practice I think the only possible solution in our society is mix of capitalism and state regulation, which ends up leading us right back to where
we started. Capitalists be warned however that if they oppress, people will vote, people will boycott, and I think that's a beautiful thing.
So I have every right in the world to call out the bakery owner in Colorado for refusing to make the gay wedding cake as well as the print-shop
refusing to create artwork for a gay wedding. They're disgusting, views like theirs actually lead to subjugation of LGBT in other countries for who
they actually are and not what they believe and I hope everyone knows about them. That is freedom of speech and I want to know about that so I know
where to spend my money. I do not however, think that getting the state to interfere is the same argument. I actually am mostly happy with my
which make discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status illegal
, although some exemptions to
these laws such as the ability to expel gay students from religious schools are simply despicable.
I would appreciate to hear your thoughts on this subject if at all possible.
edit on 29/12/18 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)