• Kittengineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Again I draw the line on discrimination based on how a person was born vs their decisions.

    Bakers can say no to nazis, democrats, republicans, tattoos, whatever.

    But bakers being able to say no just because how you are born: white, black, male, female, gay, straight… that’s horse shit.

    Why would argue that’s ok or morally correct or fair?

    • emperorbenguin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem is that while it is obvious to you that sexual orientation is a matter of birth and not choice, it isn’t to, to be honest, the vast majority of people on this planet.

      And also, just to put things in perspective, even the science isn’t fully convinced. Most evidence tells us it’s something from birth, and my personal life anecdote tells me I’m bisexual since the day I was born, but truthfully we don’t have any hard evidence to prove it, since it is nearly impossible to prove.

      This is why it has to be included with the rest.

      • venia_sil@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This, and not to mention the science changes.

        The color of the skin might be something you are “born as”, but as Michael Jackson proved you can certainly change it. Does it mean it is a choice, and not “something that you are”? What happens once CRISPR becomes commonplace?