Religious freedom, political correctness, and the culture of outrage

[crazy canuck]

CC - I really don't see how the USSC has given "superpriority to religious beliefs". 

Rather than the age old Rule of Law that all are equal under laws of general application Corporations now get to opt out of laws of general application based on the religious beliefs of their shareholders.  It is a terrible decision that will have terrible knock on consequences for the US.

[crazy canuck]

So for example people should not be exluded from enjoying full rights under the law because of their race, religion etc.  Under this principle a shop keeping may not discriminate by refusing to serve people of a different race, religion etc.

Are you sure of that? The second sentence doesn't seem to be connected to the first. A shopkeeper is not the law.

Just trying to act dumb? 

[Norgy]

Quite frankly, there's as much of a counter-attack on perceived political correctness with as much outrage as there is a culture of outrage on the left. There's a reason Europe voted the stupid shithead ticket in the last EU parliamentary elections. Nobody's communicating anymore, they're proselytising and postulating.

Culture warriors with no sense of perspective dominate both sides.
Fuck them all.

[grumbler]

Agreed.  Too many groups, too many people, for whom the nurturing and perpetuation of outrage is their central organizing principle.

Yep.  It gets so tiresome.  And the fact the right wing has grafted onto this and now everybody is a victim 

The right wing invented this.

[Ideologue]

Quite frankly, there's as much of a counter-attack on perceived political correctness with as much outrage as there is a culture of outrage on the left. There's a reason Europe voted the stupid shithead ticket in the last EU parliamentary elections. Nobody's communicating anymore, they're proselytising and postulating.

Culture warriors with no sense of perspective dominate both sides.
Fuck them all.

[Ed Anger]

This thread needs trigger warnings.

[Valmy]

This thread needs trigger warnings.

Trigger Warning: Douchebaggery

[Ed Anger]

This thread needs trigger warnings.

Trigger Warning: Douchebaggery

Thank you.

[Richard Hakluyt]

As Voltaire once remarked "I disapprove of what you say and I'm going to scream and scream until you stop saying it.".

[MadImmortalMan]

So for example people should not be exluded from enjoying full rights under the law because of their race, religion etc.  Under this principle a shop keeping may not discriminate by refusing to serve people of a different race, religion etc.

Are you sure of that? The second sentence doesn't seem to be connected to the first. A shopkeeper is not the law.

Just trying to act dumb? 

Not at all. You're trying to equate equal protection under law with equal treatment of each other. It's not the same thing.

[Ideologue]

I honestly don't see a regression.  Do you guys really see a regression?  In the 1950s, I'd probably literally be in gaol for my political opinions.

[MadImmortalMan]

I honestly don't see a regression.  Do you guys really see a regression?  In the 1950s, I'd probably literally be in gaol for my political opinions.

Oh yeah me too. In the 1850s I'd be hanged. 

[Ideologue]

Indeed.  And as far as private actor shrillness, we need only look at any given election year of the past.

[Syt]

While I think that all people/companies should be treated equal under law, I also think that unless he's breaking any laws, a shop owner, in his shop on his ground should have the right to refuse service to people if he so wishes (but should also be prepared to be called out on it).

The original purpose of human rights laws was to ensure the first principle which is a something with which most people agree.   So for example people should not be exluded from enjoying full rights under the law because of their race, religion etc.  Under this principle a shop keeping may not discriminate by refusing to serve people of a different race, religion etc.

But that principle seems to have been lost.  Now equality under the law has been replaced by a kind of superpriority under the law.  And now the US Supreme Court has gone further and given superpriority to religious beliefs.   The pendulum has swung way too far.

Syt - we had the principle that "businesses could refuse service to anyone they wanted" before.  It led to certain populations being denied service.

It's why I said, "Unless he breaks any laws" (which in many cases he would). And he would have to live with being ostracized if people disagree with his discrimination. I'm always in favor of intolerant fucks to reveal themselves for the douchebags they are.

[Eddie Teach]

Besides, shopkeepers have been replaced by soulless corporations who have little incentive to turn away customers.