Religiously Based Service Refusal

[dzheremi]

There's an elephant in this room (ok …survey) which no-one has yet raised.

The question asked is:
A small business owner in <their state> should be allowed to refuse to provide products or services to < group> , if doing so violated their religious beliefs”

For each Group the reason for refusal remains the same i.e. 'if doing so violated their religious belief". Why would the survey find a difference in the level of acceptability of a gay/lesbian violating their religious belief compared an African American violating their religious belief compared to an atheist or Jew violating their religious belief? They are all accused of doing the same thing.

This seems like an easy one:

Not all of those populations are reasoned by all respondents to be as likely to violate the shop owners' religious belief (whatever that is).

Most people have heard of Christian groups which are anti-gay marriage or whatever, and have heard of the various recent cases surrounding religiously-based service refusals that have intersected with that particular issue and population. So it is a fairly salient issue.

By contrast, it has been perhaps several decades (maybe less, depending on where you live in the US) since most people have heard anyone argue against particular races of people in the context of preaching this or that version of Christianity. I think Bob Jones University was the last time I heard about that, and they stopped their ban on interracial dating after public outcry led them to reconsider it back in 2000. 20 years ago already. So that is a less salient issue.

One obvious reason is that the survey is not really measuring the acceptability of a particular group violating religious belief. It may actually be measuring the underlying acceptability of that group. Hence the different results for different groups. If this is correct, then the result has nothing to do with violating religious belief - it's an indirect measurement of prejudice.

OB

Why are you jumping to that conclusion? If I support another person's right to discriminate as they see fit, does it mean that I see it as fit to discriminate that way, too? Nobody can ever support the right of someone else to be wrong and live wrongly and behave wrongly?

Well then...seeing as how you're an atheist posting on a Christian messageboard, I'm glad that's not actually how reality works.

 

[Hank77]

That doesn't make it ethical to refuse, though.

I don't watch movies containing immoral acts so why would I support one with my own actions?
That doesn't mean I would ever be rude or mean to a gay couple and I even love some gay people and their partners that I personally know very well.
ie. Say my adult child has an affair, cheating on their spouse. I can love them and be kind to them but I'm not going to cover for them, lie for them, or support that relationship in any way.

 

[Occams Barber]

This seems like an easy one:

Not all of those populations are reasoned by all respondents to be as likely to violate the shop owners' religious belief (whatever that is).

Most people have heard of Christian groups which are anti-gay marriage or whatever, and have heard of the various recent cases surrounding religiously-based service refusals that have intersected with that particular issue and population. So it is a fairly salient issue.

By contrast, it has been perhaps several decades (maybe less, depending on where you live in the US) since most people have heard anyone argue against particular races of people in the context of preaching this or that version of Christianity. I think Bob Jones University was the last time I heard about that, and they stopped their ban on interracial dating after public outcry led them to reconsider it back in 2000. 20 years ago already. So that is a less salient issue.

I actually thought about this i.e. the likelihood that judgements are based on the probability that Group X will ask for something which will violate religious sensibility. The problem is that it's difficult to see what an atheist could possibly ask for. Jews - possible but being asked to photograph a barmitzva hardly warrants a 19% approval to refuse rating. It's even harder to see an African American demanding something which is counter to Christian sensibility. Please don't tell me the race issue has gone away. I'm hearing for too much to accept that.

I'm not going to say you're totally wrong - it may be a factor, but the numbers suggest something a little more visceral.

Why are you jumping to that conclusion? If I support another person's right to discriminate as they see fit, does it mean that I see it as fit to discriminate that way, too? Nobody can ever support the right of someone else to be wrong and live wrongly and behave wrongly?

You're missing the point. I'm saying that the results are based on underlying prejudice in the survey subjects as opposed to the acceptability of refusing service.

Well then...seeing as how you're an atheist posting on a Christian messageboard, I'm glad that's not actually how reality works.

I have no idea what this last sentence means.
OB

 

[Chrystal-J]

You're missing the point. I'm saying that the results are based on underlying prejudice in the survey subjects as opposed to the acceptability of refusing service.

How would someone know you're an atheist unless you told them? What kind of service would an atheist be refused? My family is atheist and they've never been refused service.

 

[Hank77]

As a general observation Hank - I've reached this point a number of times before with American posters. The often expressed view is that the law or Constitution or Bill of Rights, allows or disallows a particular activity therefore it is acceptable/morally correct. I suspect it has a little to do with the semi-sacred view that some US Christians have of your founding documents.

Laws vary across countries. What we should be looking at is not what my law or your law says is OK or not. We need to look at principles.
OB

In my original post, I explained that neither question was relevant to my view. My view isn't about selling something to any particular group, my view is based solely on what I am being asked to personally do, my actions.
I don't believe that I should be put in the position of giving up my family's livelihood or doing something that I believe would compromise my relationship with my God.

 

[Occams Barber]

How would someone know you're an atheist unless you told them? What kind of service would an atheist be refused? My family is atheist and they've never been refused service.

I agree. The problem is that 24% of survey participants thought that it was OK to refuse service to Atheists if in doing so they violated their religious belief.
OB

 

[Hank77]

How would someone know you're an atheist unless you told them? What kind of service would an atheist be refused? My family is atheist and they've never been refused service.

I thought that was odd too.

 

[Occams Barber]

I don't believe that I should be put in the position of giving up my family's livelihood or doing something that I believe would compromise my relationship with my God.

And I don't believe you should be doing anything which discriminates against someone based on their race or gender or religion or age or disability or sexual preference. Christianity habitually discriminates on, at least, three of these.
OB

 

[Hank77]

I agree. The problem is that 24% of survey participants thought that it was OK to refuse service to Atheists if in doing so they violated their religious belief.
OB

So the point is that it doesn't matter what group one fits into, it's really about violating one's religious beliefs.

 

[Hank77]

And I don't believe you should be doing anything which discriminates against someone based on their race or gender or religion or age or disability or sexual preference. Christianity habitually discriminates on, at least, three of these.
OB

They discriminate in at least three of them when selling them products or services? Which three are those?

 

[Chrystal-J]

So the point is that it doesn't matter what group one fits into, it's really about violating one's religious beliefs.

I agree. Everyone's rights are a concern, except religious beliefs.

 

[Occams Barber]

They discriminate in at least three of them when selling them products or services? Which three are those?

Gender, religion and sexual preference and I'm not talking here about products and services. I'm talking about Christianity in a more general sense.

OB

 

[Hank77]

Gender, religion and sexual preference and I'm not talking here about products and services. I'm talking about Christianity a more general sense.

OB

OK, that does make a big difference.
How do Christians habitually discriminate against religion and gender?

 

[Chrystal-J]

Gender, religion and sexual preference and I'm not talking here about products and services. I'm talking about Christianity in a more general sense.

OB

Why is Muslim refusal of service for gays, etc. never mentioned?
Link: Video puts Muslim bakeries, florists in gay-rights spotlight
From article:
The video showing Muslim bakers in Michigan reluctant to bake a cake for a gay wedding went viral last weekend, snaring more than 2.2 million views in three days and igniting debate over whether Christian business owners are being singled out for lawsuits, complaints and media focus.

 

[Occams Barber]

OK, that does make a big difference.
How do Christians habitually discriminate against religion and gender?

• What proportion of Christian priests, pastors, ministers, bishops, archbishops etc. are women?
• Would you be comfortable if your particular industry mandated that celibate men were the only people who could occupy leadership positions?
• Which of these religious orientations is necessary for teaching arithmetic; Baptist or Presbyterian?
• In an old people's home who is the better carer - a Catholic or a Buddhist?

You've obviously already worked out the sexual preference discrimination.
OB

 

[Occams Barber]

Why is Muslim refusal of service for gays, etc. never mentioned?
Link: Video puts Muslim bakeries, florists in gay-rights spotlight
From article:
The video showing Muslim bakers in Michigan reluctant to bake a cake for a gay wedding went viral last weekend, snaring more than 2.2 million views in three days and igniting debate over whether Christian business owners are being singled out for lawsuits, complaints and media focus.

I don't know. They should also be called out if they are discriminating. Be careful - the fact that Muslim bakers may be discriminating doesn't make it OK for Christians to do it.
OB

 

[Chrystal-J]

I don't know. They should also be called out if they are discriminating. Be careful - the fact that Muslim bakers may be discriminating doesn't make it OK for Christians to do it.
OB

But, it is ok to make people go against their religious beliefs (Muslim or Christian). It's a reverse kind of discrimination.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

Christianity habitually discriminates on, at least, three of these.

Okay, kids, note this so you can see where this is all going.

 

[Occams Barber]

But, it is ok to make people go against their religious beliefs (Muslim or Christian). It's a reverse kind of discrimination.

• Q. Do you believe that discrimination is wrong?
• A. Yes, because discrimination harms people by cutting them off from opportunities and suggests that they are less able than others
• Q. Why should Christianity be able to discriminate and consequently harm people?
• A. Because it always has?

OB

 

[Hank77]

• What proportion of Christian priests, pastors, ministers, bishops, archbishops etc. are women?
• Would you be comfortable if your particular industry mandated that celibate men were the only people who could occupy leadership positions?
• Which of these religious orientations is necessary for teaching arithmetic; Baptist or Presbyterian?
• In an old people's home who is the better carer - a Catholic or a Buddhist?

You've obviously already worked out the sexual preference discrimination.
OB

The first one depends on which denomination one is but it's not discrimination because it depends on their interpretation of a couple of the scriptures. Women in those denominations wouldn't believe they should be preaching.

The second is particular to the Catholic church only, as far as I know. The women, nuns, are also celibate.

The third one I don't understand what you are referring to.

And the fourth one, in my view, either one could be a wonderful caregiver. I'd rather have a skilled Buddhist caregiver than an unskilled Christian one.