Dana Rohrabacher says its OK not to sell homes to gays

[bitches]

A written statement is more reasonably construed as an endorsement by the employee, I think. It's drawing a line to compromise somewhere that allows reasonable freedom to everyone involved. We ought to be able to accommodate for the beliefs of others with a concession as simple as serving those with differing religious beliefs, if we are to consider ourselves a civil society.

[Big D Duchovny]

I guess pragmatism is the word, as with many other things. Thanks for your thoughts, though, they're appreciated.

[AnastasiaOccult]

I feel like if a business wanted to be successful and wanted to protect itself from any sort of discourse, they wouldn't pull a stunt like this even if they had the right to or had the conviction to do so. It's a marketing nightmare to say that you wouldn't serve LGBT people in this day and age where we wont shut up about the LGBT community and the fight for equity. So really, looking from the business perspective, I don't think a successful company would have the bravado and the will to tank their business to stand up for an ideology/philosophy that isn't taken too kindly anymore.

[bitches]

A few years ago Chick Fil A was discovered to be sending money to anti-gay lobbyists. The result was a huge boom in sales with long lines from customers happy that a corporation was supporting their views.

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/108633/f17b6b40-06cf-417a-b985-976ba01f4e5e/image.png

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/108633/ba4a85df-b4b1-4d3c-ab66-7064ace7cb19/image.png

[Big D Duchovny]

My bi GF goes there with her lesbian friends pretty regularly. I do chide them for it, but apparently the sauce is just really good.

[bitches]

Yeah the lack of conviction with the LGBT students at my uni is discouraging.

[ThigkHighSuccubi]

A marriage can be entirely secular though, not to mention almost every practicing religion both monotheist and nontheist or polytheist has marriage. At that point it's the baker imposing his ideas of what marriage should be onto customers, as opposed to the opposite. It'd be no different if he were denying to make something symbolic of a Islamic or Hindu marriage (without some other related reason, like an ISIS cake or something), something which IS against the constitution. His personal views on marriage should have no say in the matter.