this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
458 points (94.0% liked)

News

22896 readers
4158 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

His win is a direct result of the Supreme Court's decision in a pivotal LGBTQ+ rights case.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

I'd say anything that could be considered as creative, and isn't necessary for life.

That said, I'd rather non-essential creatives be allowed to discriminate. Who wants a closeted homophobe photographing their wedding? I'd rather a non-professional friend do it with their cell phone.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Should they also be allowed to have a whites only business? Because I'm pretty sure they legally can't discriminate that way. It's only okay if someone is LGBT+.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

No. But he should be able to reject creating something that says “whites only” or “straights only”.

Example:

Denying a “white power” photo session - should be legal

Denying taking senior photos because the client is white - should not be legal

Denying professional headshots because the client is gay - should not be legal

Denying a “gay pride” photo session - should be legal (though you’re an asshole if you do it IMO)

But the thing is, don’t even give a reason. You don’t have to take every job, and you don’t have to say why. If you make the stand to not take a certain job because of political reasons, you are bringing negative attention on yourself

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I don't think you understood what I said.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The difference is in the business model.

If they're working individual jobs on a freelance, case by case, contract-based model, then they can do whatever they want as far as signing a contract to do work or not signing a contract to do work with whomever they wish.

The reasons might be shitty sometimes, but that's not enough of a reason to compel all freelancers to do work they don't want to.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are you actually claiming that as long as you're freelance, you can discriminate against people by race?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm saying you don't have to sign any contract you don't want to sign with anyone for any reason.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Any reason including "I don't work with black people?" Are you sure about that?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So you're saying minorities don't have a right to anything but the bare essentials?

Or are you saying the right of bigoted business owners to discriminate trumps the right of individuals to be treated equally?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

I don't think you understood what I said.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is mixing a drink creative?

Is hairstyling creative?

Is designing landscapes creative?

Is putting shingles on a house creative?

Is doing electrical work creative?

What type of work that requires some level of skill and design specific to the project not creative?

Why don't minorities deserve the right to hire the same businesses as everyone else?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

I don't think you understood what I said.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I’d say anything that could be considered as creative

This is basically how it's handled. In the Masterpiece Cake case it wasn't about selling the couple "just" a cake. If they'd wanted one out of the case the Shop was legally required to sell them one. They wanted a custom cake and that falls under "creative" which changes the rules.

The United States has long held that artistic expression, basically creative work, is protected under the 1st Amendment as a type of speech and the Government cannot compel speech without extreme need and even then it can only do it narrowly and temporarily.

What we really have with these is a collision between individual rights. Is it fair for the Government to abrogate the 1st Amendment Right of one person by compelling them to speak (create art) in order to satisfy the 14th Amendment Right of another person?

It may seem obvious but consider the controversy around Piss Christ. It was art and was thus subject to 1st Amendment protections and without those protections it would have been removed.

So not allowing art, creative work, 1st Amendment Protections would cause a pile of other problems. There is no perfect solutions when rights collide, there are only trade-offs.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Thank you for that great explanation!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yes. I mean... if someone thinks it's okay to force a minority to create racist content, their opinion isn't worth a reply. And logically, that's essentially what is being said when someone wants to force someone to create to spec something they don't agree with.