Shop owner will deny openly gay customers WOODTV.com
I don't see how fixing the vehicle of an openly gay couple goes against his religious beliefs. Where in his holy book does it suggest that he shouldn't sell goods/services to gay people? Is he mad he's not allowed to kill them as the bible instructs, or just scared that seeing two guys kissing will give him an erection?
Dear
Donald Polish
Would it help to compare it to not wanting to do business for a Klan member
because you don't want to associate with anyone in that network or lifestyle.
What if someone is against fracking, or against meat-eating or the fur trade;
and doesn't want to do business with anyone who is pro-fracking, or who buys and sells fur,
or who runs a bunch of McDonald's that is contributing to destruction of rainforests.
So what.
Now I understand that the
* role and responsibility of the CONSUMER/CUSTOMER
is different from
* the role and responsibility of the BUSINESS that is registered to operate through the State
So similar to the issues of marriage that are mixed in with the State,
where the solution may be to SEPARATE marriage from the State to AVOID introducing conflict;
maybe something similar needs to be done with business practices and resolving policy conflicts.
However, what I might suggest, is setting up a
Constitutional Ethics level of law that is managed by the public, so the assistance
offered VOLUNTARILY can be applied to ANY level: church, private, business, nonprofit,
city, county, state, federal, public institution, religious or political corporation, etc.
And use THAT to mediate any conflicts so people can 'redress grievances
and protect equal access to due process'
And then require that any collective institution with more influence or resources than a single individual be required to "redress grievances" through a facilitated process to resolve conflicts.
This way, neither the citizens nor the companies can get away with abuses. The complaints and objections would be worked through, with the purpose of reaching agreement by correcting any problems. So instead of problems escalating into lawsuits, they'd be nipped in the bud.
It would be like a Constitutional process, but offered and moderated freely.
Not a money making process that the legal and legislative system has become,
where parties and candidates seek funds to raise a big fuss to railroad over other parties.
