Shoot the Wall (A.K.A. The Rant Thread)

[Carol the Dabbler]

1 hour ago, Pseudonym said:

We had a party leader not so long ago who was forced to resign after saying he didn't support gay marriage because it conflicted with his Christian beliefs. 

 

1 hour ago, besleybean said:

He has the right to his personl beliefs, but whether or not they should be involved with what is supposed to be a secular state?

 

That's a tough question.  I think in general an elected or appointed official should uphold the law.  But on the other hand, I wouldn't have much respect for someone who did his job even though he considered the act to be morally represensible.  Though of course my reaction might also be influenced by whether I agreed or disagreed with his decision.

[besleybean]

Difficult when you're legislating on personal decisions for others.

[Arcadia]

14 hours ago, besleybean said:

That's fine as long as you don't live in a theocracy or somehwere there is a massive religious lobby...and not like there are many places like that in the world,hey?!

Right, I was thinking of my circumstances specifically … where I was raised thinking I had to right to question any kind of authority, including religious ones, as long as I'm not breaking a law. I've never had to live under a theocracy or some such, thank goodness. But I feel bad for people who do.

1 hour ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

That's a tough question.  I think in general an elected or appointed official should uphold the law.  But on the other hand, I wouldn't have much respect for someone who did his job even though he considered the act to be morally represensible.  Though of course my reaction might also be influenced by whether I agreed or disagreed with his decision.

Yeah, that's where it gets tricky. Like the case of the bakery that refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. I didn't agree with their refusal, but I think I have to respect their right to make that decision. I kept thinking … what if it was me, and someone commissioned me to make a painting celebrating Nazism? Absolutely I think I should have the right to turn them down, if their beliefs offend me. Yet they have a right to not be declined service for something that is personal. Or do they? It's hard to know where to draw the line, sometimes. Are you a better person for adhering strictly to your own beliefs? Or are you better for being tolerant of other people's beliefs? I think there's usually a middle ground in there somewhere, but it keeps shifting around. 

[Van Buren Supernova]

On 9/15/2018 at 8:36 AM, Pseudonym said:

The main difference being I'm not going around to their houses handing out brochures about evolution. People can believe whatever the hell they want, what I take exception to is the idea of pushing their beliefs onto others. 

 

On 9/15/2018 at 9:40 AM, Carol the Dabbler said:

I'm no fonder of those visits than you are.  But seriously and in all fairness, considering that their intent is to save your immortal soul, they show considerable restraint.

 

On 9/15/2018 at 1:43 PM, Pseudonym said:

It’s incredibly patronising believing my soul needs saving just because I don’t have the same beliefs. I wasn’t rude when she was reading sections of the Bible at me, literally preaching, nor was I rude when she gave out leaflets. I was unbearably British about the whole thing. However I find it incredibly cheeky to try to force your religion onto other people and trying to convince someone [who is about to be] training to be a scientist that science is wrong seems very ill advised. Am I one hundred per cent sure that the various scientific theories are correct? No, of course not, and there is a reason they are called theory rather than fact, but I’m more inclined to believe in them than in... actually I should probably stop there because I hate organised religion and I’ll start really offending people. The point is, don’t come to my house or my place of work and try to convert me when I’ve made it clear it’s not going to happen.

 

On 9/18/2018 at 7:42 AM, Arcadia said:

Or, "you're going to Hell." I've had a couple of people tell me that's where I'm headed, since I don't follow their faith. So charming.

I don't believe my soul is worth saving if my parents, loved ones, siblings, others, and kind strangers are going to hell for having different religious beliefs than me. So I would gladly tell those saviors to leave my soul alone.

I wouldn't want to be in the 'good place' where the admission is based on what you call yourself instead of the meaning of things you have done in your life. 

[besleybean]

People can say what they like.

As far as I'm concerned neither heaven nor hell exist, so it matters to me not one iota.

[Artemis]

10 hours ago, Arcadia said:

Yeah, that's where it gets tricky. Like the case of the bakery that refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. I didn't agree with their refusal, but I think I have to respect their right to make that decision. I kept thinking … what if it was me, and someone commissioned me to make a painting celebrating Nazism? Absolutely I think I should have the right to turn them down, if their beliefs offend me. Yet they have a right to not be declined service for something that is personal. Or do they? It's hard to know where to draw the line, sometimes.

I haven't worked out exactly where I stand on the matter yet, but currently I think I'd put the line where custom art is commissioned.  If I walked into a bakery and picked out one of the generic cakes on display with flowers or hearts on it or whatever, I don't think I should be refused to buy what is available off the shelf.  But if I came in with a custom order of decor, I wouldn't expect to be served if the baker was uncomfortable making something customized that way.  I'd have the same expectations with any other artistic business.  I wouldn't force a painter to paint me naked if they didn't want to; I wouldn't throw a fit if an Etsy shop refused my customization request; I'd find another seller.  It's their name and their reputation.  If they don't want it associated with something, then I think that is their right, as an artist; just as it is your right, as a consumer, to put your money where it's deserved and take your business elsewhere, write reviews, and tell everyone you know that you don't recommend their shop because of their attitude.

Are you a better person for adhering strictly to your own beliefs? Or are you better for being tolerant of other people's beliefs? I think there's usually a middle ground in there somewhere, but it keeps shifting around.

I think you can do both, honestly: It's called "Live and let live."  I live by my conscience, you live by yours.  Where people seem to get confused is when they think that adhering to their own beliefs means being intolerant of other people's.  It doesn't.  All they have to do is let other people make their own choices, and not allow those choices to bother them, because frankly it's not their life and none of their business.  Wanting to control things is where the problems start, and that goes for all sides.  People don't pick their battles properly.  Subjugation and violence are things actually worth fighting against, but people would rather wage war over philosophies.

 

[Pseudonym]

I'm torn on the cake issue too. There was also a B&B that refused to let a gay couple rent a room. I may find their attitudes abhorrent, but since it's their business and everyone is entitled to their views it's a tricky one... if a bakery or a B&B refused to serve someone because of their race that wouldn't be okay so I don't see why refusing the serve someone on their sexuality would be. Tricky.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

With the Colorado baker that refused the custom cake for the gay couple, he did not deny them service in general, just the custom cake.  He gave them other options and the couple had several other bakeries in the area that were more than willing to make them the cake they wanted.  They chose to go after him instead (went all the way to the Supreme Court and the court ruled in favor of religious freedom for the baker as he wasn't denying them service in general, just the custom cake on the grounds of religious beliefs).

 

As for religion being private, while it is something very personal, what you believe religiously needs to show in your life otherwise what can be believed about you as you will be showing what amounts to a double standard.  For someone that claims to be a Christian, their political platform was likely lined with Christian values and that will show in the way they vote for laws while serving in office.  Also, there are many countries (especially those that are predominantly Islam-based) where discussing religion and politics is part of the social norm.  So in countries such as the US where that is not the norm, when we befriend Muslims, be prepared to talk religion and politics.

 

I also happen to go for intelligent design as I find cells way to complex for anything remotely random as evolution the way I was taught 20 years ago let alone a full fledged creature.  (I also believe in a heaven and a hell and realized many years ago that it was better to live as if those places existed with only 1 way to heaven, die, and find out I was wrong (that either there are multiple ways or neither place exists) than to not believe in either place or that there are multiple ways to heaven, die, and find out I was wrong and there really was only 1 way.  The first has no real losses to it while the second could cost everything.)  

[Pseudonym]

I won't get into the rest of it, but with the B&B case here the court ruled on the side of the gay couple. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25119158

[Artemis]

17 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

I'm torn on the cake issue too. There was also a B&B that refused to let a gay couple rent a room. I may find their attitudes abhorrent, but since it's their business and everyone is entitled to their views it's a tricky one... if a bakery or a B&B refused to serve someone because of their race that wouldn't be okay so I don't see why refusing the serve someone on their sexuality would be. Tricky.

See, the B&B thing doesn't seem quite right to me.  I don't know the story there, but I feel there's a difference between that and a cake for a wedding.  Renting a room is a general service, even if it is a B&B rather than a big hotel.  That's like a cab service refusing to drive a gay couple, or refusing to sell stamps to a gay couple or something, I donno, lol.  Producing something specially-made for a customer is different than selling something already made to a customer, whether it's a cake or a room or any other kind of service.  For another thing, a wedding cake is a piece of edible art made for an event, and it's basically a huge advertisement for your business.  Renting a room out isn't advertising anything, because no one has to know who your individual patrons are.

Along the same line, refusing to serve someone because of their race is also different than refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, because there is a difference between serving people and serving events.  The former is based on what they look like/who they are, not what they're doing or what they're asking for; and you really can't refuse service to someone on that basis.  If, for example, a gay person asked a baker to make a cake for his niece's birthday party, and the baker said no because "they don't serve gay people", that would be equivalent to refusing service to someone based on race.  But a wedding cake is for an event, not a person.

So I will amend my earlier statement to say that I suppose I would draw the line at customized art, and/or if the refusal is of an event or project, not a person.

 

[Pseudonym]

Ha, I think the opposite, that the B&B is more understandable than the cake. If you think gay sex is a sin, and there is a possibility that they would be having gay sex under your roof that seems more objectionable (though I still don't get it) than just making a cake. 

[Artemis]

From a moral standpoint, maybe, but I was contemplating under what circumstances they'd have the legal right to refuse business.  A moral objection doesn't necessarily justify a legal one, and a sin committed in a private room doesn't have the same chance of affecting your business reputation as a public display of your craft; so from a legal and business standpoint, rather than a personal one, a custom cake may be more objectionable.

I admit, the sin argument always annoys me a bit.  Whether you believe gay sex is or isn't a sin, whatever; but there are lots of sins.  Homosexuality just has the misfortune of being more obvious.  Lying is a sin too, what precautions are you taking to keep liars from renting one of your rooms? 

 

[Pseudonym]

Or infidelity... meeting up with someone other than your spouse in a B&B is a bit of a cliche. 

[Artemis]

^ Indeed!

 

[besleybean]

Gay couples can of course marry...

But really, why are religious people so obsessed with what others do in bed?

It's uheallthy, I tell you.

[T.o.b.y]

Interesting discussion. 

The cake issue reminds me of a restaurant around here that recently announced that it was going to stop serving families with children under 12 years old. There was a public outcry and the question was raised whether this was discrimination. Personally, I think that depends on how essential the service that is being denied is and whether there are reasonable alternatives. If I wanted a cake for my wedding or a restaurant dinner and the caterer or restaurant refused because they didn't like my sexual orientation or the fact that I have reproduced, I would probably just shrug my shoulders and go to the next place. If it was housing, social services or a job that I was being denied, I would fight tooth and nail. Or if every single restaurant / bakery / whatever turned me down. 

I don't understand why you would want your wedding cake to be made by someone who disapproves of your union anyway. 

As for religion and politics, the party our chancellor belongs to has "Christian" in the name and they teach religious education in public school but all in all, Germany seems way more secular and relaxed on religious issues than the US to me. 

[besleybean]

Yes we have compulsory RE in all schools in the UK.

Certainly in Scotland that includes as many of the world religions as they can squeeze in.

But RE is just about to have a major overhaul here and will hopefully include atheism and humanism etc.

We have compulsory assemblies, too, but certainly in my school they are almost entirely secular.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

From the research I have done, I find that countries that have established church and state together tend to be leaning more secular and in some cases, the state church has strayed away from the Bible they once held dear.

[Van Buren Supernova]

I wonder if racism and discrimination are ever going to disappear.

I suppose everyone had experienced some, somewhere somehow.  Even when it doesn't have anything to do with certain appearance and orientation, there are still discrimination in probably every single factor in our life.  Wealth, social status, insurance policy. Using insurance? Here is generic lowest end medicine. Not having insurance? You'll get high 'quality' expensive medicine, no insurance and poor? Good luck and we'd get back to you. Work, street, every day life. Nobody likes it, yet I believe everyone has some dosage of racism and discrimination in their bone, I know I do, I can't stand morons and slow walkers and that bloke with big nose. But luckily there are still a lot of tolerant people. It's sad that some having it tougher than the other, especially when they are already in difficult situation themselves.

The other day I was thinking and actually felt something could be different, or perhaps better in the future. Well, despite the possible negative influence of technology and lifestyle, younger generation seems relatively more receptive to difference and taking matters in more relaxed way. The level of exposure and education are probably good contributing factor. I don't know, maybe because I've been reading things so I get the idea that they want to enjoy life more, are better at handling diversity and hopefully have more awareness to the environment. Maybe despite all the eye rolling that I gave on questionable things they do on social media, there is actually hope after all.

Anyway, as someone who had gone through good level of racism and discrimination in the past and sometimes still, at points when it's life threatening (which of course I'd say to fight tooth and nail against it and should be taken very seriously)  but in cake case, I'd say just try to move on like what Toby'd said, why you would want your wedding cake to be made by someone who disapproves of your union anyway.  

Visigoth and spider.

[Artemis]

12 hours ago, besleybean said:

But really, why are religious people so obsessed with what others do in bed?

All of society is sex-obsessed. 

55 minutes ago, Van Buren Supernova said:

I wonder if racism and discrimination are ever going to disappear.

Nah.  Not completely, anyway.  That's like asking if murder is ever going to disappear.  It's just not possible, in my opinion.

10 hours ago, T.o.b.y said:

Personally, I think that depends on how essential the service that is being denied is and whether there are reasonable alternatives. If I wanted a cake for my wedding or a restaurant dinner and the caterer or restaurant refused because they didn't like my sexual orientation or the fact that I have reproduced, I would probably just shrug my shoulders and go to the next place. If it was housing, social services or a job that I was being denied, I would fight tooth and nail. Or if every single restaurant / bakery / whatever turned me down. 

I don't understand why you would want your wedding cake to be made by someone who disapproves of your union anyway.

^ Agreed.

The cake issue reminds me of a restaurant around here that recently announced that it was going to stop serving families with children under 12 years old. There was a public outcry and the question was raised whether this was discrimination.

I heard about something like that recently... I think it was Viking River Cruises that adopted a child-free policy.  Some people are outraged, but I actually think it's fine.

It's hard for me to fault more businesses for going child-free.  It seems like a lot more parents aren't teaching their kids how to behave in public these days.  When I was a kid, if a child misbehaved in public, most parents would either scold them quietly until they stopped, or remove them from the building if they didn't.  It was the parents' responsibility to keep their child under control, teach them how to be quiet, and be considerate of how their behavior might be affecting other people around them.  Now, it seems like most parents just let their kids act however they want, without discipline or consideration, while it's the employees' responsibility to babysit, the company that gets sued if something happens to their kid while they weren't paying attention, and everyone else who just has to live with it.  Child-free policies are the consequence.  I can see how it might be insulting or limiting, and frustrating if you are one of those parents who does teach their children manners, because you can't control what other parents do either.  Nobody feels fairly dealt with when a few ruin it for the rest.

As for religion and politics, the party our chancellor belongs to has "Christian" in the name and they teach religious education in public school but all in all, Germany seems way more secular and relaxed on religious issues than the US to me.

I actually think the US is pretty secular and relaxed on religious issues, overall.  It's just news and politics (and people who act beastly on social media) that give off a different impression, because those are concentrated doses of issues going on in the US, and we have a looot of people.  On top of that, US news tends to be world news a lot more often than news of other countries, so everyone hears about our issues more.

Those who aren't so relaxed, though, come from both sides, I think.  Non-religious people and religious people alike can be unnecessarily contentious and nitpicky with each other, instead of just letting things go when they aren't really that important.

That said, I'm dreading the annual "War on Christmas" debate I'm sure to hear about come November.

 

[besleybean]

@Artemis...this bunny isn't obsessed!

[Pseudonym]

13 hours ago, besleybean said:

But really, why are religious people so obsessed with what others do in bed?

This mystifies me to. It's none of their f***ing business!

And I keep getting cross posted so I'll post this first then read the rest  This was in answer to the VBS comment:

I don't think they wanted the cake made by them, it's more about the point of being turned away because of what they are. 

I don't know about the future, it seems to be at a crossroads. On the one hand younger people are more tolerant and used to people who are different from themselves, but on the other hand right wing groups seem to be on the rise all over the world and are often populated with (predominately) young angry white men. I grew up with very tolerant parents and friends, I'd be aghast if one of my friends said something homophobic and racist, but perhaps if I'd been surrounded by people who were like that maybe I'd be indoctrinated into that way of thinking...? I like to think I'd be aware enough to not fall into that trap, but who knows? But yes, I'm not an angel, I have some less than PC thoughts about some sections of society though I do my best to curtail them. 

[besleybean]

I have no problem with being PC...we just need to remember to uphold basic human rights, but at the same time we both have the right to opinions and  darn well the right to express them!

Unless we are legislators, of course...

[Pseudonym]

4 minutes ago, besleybean said:

@Artemis...this bunny isn't obsessed!

That, when followed by your signature, is hilarious.

[Pseudonym]

I don't see a problem with adult only restaurants.