It is becoming more and more common for private institutions - whether they be businesses, schools, or families - to be "raked over the coals" for religious beliefs. It is to the point that private institutions are losing many freedoms I don't think they should.
Personally, I think any private institution that makes its belives public knowledge (stated clearly and easily found) should be able to act on those views and beliefs as long as they don't cause harm to others and other "businesses" exist to meet the needs of those that disagree.
In 2008, a photographer was sued because she refused to photograph a same sex commitment ceremony. The only thing the same sex couple was "out" was the time to look at a webpage, write two emails, and read two emails. Yet, they won a court case and were awarded over $6000. Really - would they have wanted that photographer if she was not comfortable with the event? I don't think her photos would be the quality they would have wanted because she heart wouldn't be into her artistic work. And this wasn't in a small town where there are only a few photographers. So, they easily could have found someone else. But, according to the courts, the photographer discriminated and hence was wrong.
Recently there have been two companies that have taken heat over the same issue - one on each side. Chick-fil-a has lost customers because a franchise donated free food to a marriage conference that was openly against same sex marriage. As part of the controversy, the owners of Chick-fil-a made it clear that they do not support same sex marriage, and as a result many have been up in arms. Does Chick-fil-a refuse to serve homosexuals? No. Home Depot on the other hand has financially supported same-sex organizations and legislation. So, some people who hold to the other side choose not to shop there. Again - does Home Depot refuse to sell items to those who want marriage to be defined as a union between 1 man and 1 woman? No. I am glad (for now) this is just a case of people spending money where they want. I think this is how it should be. Although both companies haven't made it totally clear to the public their stances, the public is spreading the word and making their own decisions utilizing our free-market economy.
BYU was under a little heat recently for putting its star basketball play on probation for breaking the school's honor code. This college student had sex outside of marriage, and as a result suffered the consequences. No one at BYU is crying foul because the player knew the rules. But, those on the outside looking in are saying BYU's rules are wrong. They claim it isn't fair to expect students to not have sex. I disagree. First, there are many other schools this gentleman could have gone to. He would have gotten a free ride at MANY schools around the nation. But, he chose to go to BYU. He knew going in what was expected of him. He broke the rules and is accepting the punishment. And, it was either him or his girlfriend that told the school - it isn't like they have people going around watching them 24-7. It is an honor code, and they chose to be honorable and turn themselves in.
In the UK, many similar things are going on, and it is probably worse than the US. One human rights organization said that Christian foster parents "infect" foster children with moral values. This is the same organization that is helping a same sex couple file an appeal after being awarded "only" 6300 pounds (over $10,000) in a lawsuit because the judge took into account that the company owners were in fact acting on sincere religious convictions when refusing service instead of "just" discriminating against the couple.
I would even argue that restaurants should be able to allow smoking if they want to. Now, there must be signs posted EVERYWHERE letting potential customers know of the rules. But, if the customers and workers knew of the rules before entering the establishment, I don't have a problem with it. I see so many restaurant workers smoking outside restaurants that I don't think there would be a lack of workers. And if people wanted to be around the stench of smoke while they ate - then let them do so. Personally, I wouldn't go near the place...
What is your take? How far should the government regulate what private businesses do?
1 comment:
Good points. Well made.
It seems like the moral divide is widening in our country. I know that I started making a point to eat at Chick Fil A more after that story came out.
My Mom stopped eating out when the laws passed that restaurants could not allow smoking. She has always enjoyed smoking and talking, after finishing a meal. It was a relaxing activity for her and her relatives and friends. That activity is now extinct in her life. She stays home, and rarely sees her friends like she used to. I think it is a sad consequence to that law.
Post a Comment