I also think the problems are basically self-policing . . . .
so long as it's not outright, brazen, bold-faced discrimination. This isn't an issue of refusal of basic services. The examples I see most often is a cake baker refusing to make a same-sex wedding cake, etc., and on it's surface, the issues seem mostly confined to businesses associated with weddings. And in those cases, I feel like if a business owner wants to knowingly turn away business simply because of a religious belief, it's their loss. A customer will always find someone else willing to take their money--and most successful business owners realize that they should be in the business of attracting customers and not turning them away. (You'll notice that the conservative Chamber of Commerce types are not out beating the drums on this topic one way or another.) Furthermore, for the instances where a baker or florist or wedding planner wants to turn away business by voicing their opinion, it's hard to imagine why the potential customer wouldn't appreciate knowing about the conflict--as it will prevent them from patronizing people they would otherwise view as bigots. I mean seriously, does the gay couple *really* want their cake made by people who are hostile to them? Isn't that sort of the opposite of what they would seek to patronize?
These "religious freedom" laws cut both ways at times. Take the examples of exemptions to the controlled substances act, which prevents prosecution of native americans who use peyote as part of their religious practices. Look at the exemptions for vaccinations or other legally required responsibilities. (I actually have much more of an issue with that one in particular, rather than the cake baker scenario). I don't think it's in liberals best interests to fight tooth and nail over every example of these sorts of problems. Just because one example of 'religious freedom' in action is beneficial to non-discrimination, doesn't mean it will work that way across the board. So long as people aren't being overtly discriminated against, or publically humiliated, etc., it seems to me that the marketplace will sort all of this out in most cases. And I doubt the Indiana Chamber of Commerce folks have any delusions that talking more about this issue is going to be good for them--I'm guessing most of them want it to go away as soon as possible. Gay couples will assuredly eventually find plenty of folks to cater to them as customers, because ultimately, the business of business owners is business--not platitudes and politics.
This post was edited on 3/30 2:38 PM by Fingon
