Would you give business to one that discriminates against LGBTQI people?

In Australia, we're voting on same sex marriage, which is projected to be approved of, and some politicians are discussing protecting the rights of moral objectors (for example, cake businesses and celebrants).

Do you think people should be able to refuse business to LGBTQI people? Would you give business to one that discriminates? Why or why not?

  • Yes, I agree with their position
    Vote A
  • Yes, because they are entitled to their opinion
    Vote B
  • No, because I don't want to support their business
    Vote C
  • No, I am LGBTQI
    Vote D
Select age and gender to cast your vote:
I'm a GirlI'm a Guy

1|0
57110

Most Helpful Guy

  • no i wouldn't. in fact i personally boycotted chic-fi-la when they were still supporting camps that tried to convert LGBT people... it was a tough boycott since i love their chicken. thankfully they changed that policy

    i certainly wouldn't want to support businesses that support bigotry or intolerance

    5|7
    2|13
    • You do know it’s because it’s in their religion to not associate with gays right? Who are you to discriminate that?

    • Show All
    • I just re-read my own reply and it made no sense. Because it wouldn’t make sense for a person that gets rejected by that company in the first place to try and give them business lol

Have an opinion?

What Guys Said 109

  • Yes I’d still give business. What they believe or support is none of my business. Trying to restrict someone’s views is totalitarian in nature. As long as they don’t cause disorder or any trouble at my business, I see no other reason to refuse service to anyone regardless if they are LGBT, neutral or against LGBT.

    16|26
    1|1
    • Also if the business (es) want to reject money just because someone is a tad different is totally on the business owner.

    • Show All
    • @FakeName123 Should companies be free to hire only whatever groups that they so choose?

    • @JenSCDC

      Yes. Absolutely. If they hire someone less qualified, because of their own biases, then that's their very own loss.

  • No voters in Australia are being made to live in fear. Persecuted in the very ways they are accused of persecuting, as if all gays are Matt Shepherd, which is patently ludicrous. (A whole lot more of them are more like Adam Walsh's killer than they ever were like Shepherd. Never mind he was killed by other gays, over drug money, in their own admission. Facts don't matter to biology deniers and communists utilizing sexual anarchism anyway.)

    Australia is also a land where, in the People's Republik of Viktoria, being in possession of pro-life thoughts, let alone signs, within a 2-US-football-field-length radius of an abortion chop shop house of horrors yields you an automatic $5,000 fine.

    Does such a draconian policy help the unborn? Of course not? The mothers? Hardly! Many who have had pro-life groups intervene have stated they are thankful for the intervention, as they were coerced into going to the clinic anyway, and only went because they had been prior led to believe that abortion was their *only* real choice.

    Does society really benefit? No, not really. Who's gonna hold down the future jobs needed to keep social welfare programs alive, when half of everyone's been aborted?

    Who does benefit? The chop shop horror house operators. And no one else. Why the insane radius of no dissent allowed? To maximize profits. Plain and simple. Pure evil.

    Aussies who speak out against this are often instantaneously made second-class citizens.

    Straight sex makes babies, gay sex only shorten's lifespan. It's a deathstyle. Abortion is murder-for-profit.

    So I am with the groups that side with life, and the Author of life.

    With all the different health conditions that can destroy a colon, why would any sane human being force any other, as a condition of doing business, to stamp personal approval and affirmation on a preventable behavior that also destroys it?

    Tribut fer Essen is a policy that needs to die. If I prefer Chinese women to German women, why should I make a family starve for disagreeing with my taste?

    And what gives pervs that right? And rights come with attached implied responsibilities. What are LGBTQPIZ's responsibilities, if the entire movement is about tearing down sexual responsibility?

    0|2
    1|0
  • Yes they have every right not to cater to people if they are a private business. In fact if you do not allow them to you are discriminating against them. So which is worse to force every one to have the same opinion and belief or to allow them the choice to dictate how they live their lives? I would not want the government to come in and tell gay people they could not be gay, why would I then turn around and demand that a baker ignore his principles and his religious convictions? If all are to be free then all must have the right to decide what they do and do not endorse. If you take away these peoples right to decide then how are you any better then the people who attempt to take away the right of a gay person to love whom they will? Your doing the exact same thing for the exact same reason, taking away a persons freedom and forcing them to do what YOU think is right. That's not a good path to go down.

    1|4
    0|0
  • No. Why should I take my hard earn dollars to a business that actively practice unlawful discrimination when I can easily go to the business right across from it that doesn't practice discrimination.

    Also any business that discriminates against anyone because of sex, race, religion or sexual orientation are fools who won't last long in todays market. With online shopping and free shipping becoming the norm, businesses are going to have to step up their game if they want to survive. Practicing unlawful discrimination towards a particular demographic is essentially shooting yourself in the foot before a race.

    0|3
    0|0
  • A business is not a person. Therefore the views of the owner should not reflect upon who they serve. It's called discrimination. If they refuse service to someone not related to race, religion, creed, sexuality. That's fine. But a business I'd a business not a person.

    4|1
    0|0
  • A business can serve whoever they want to serve... it's not a person's God given right to be served in a shop.
    A shop owner could refuse to serve me just on the basis that he gets a bad vibe from me 😂

    The beauty of capitalism is that if the gay person doesn't spend money at the shop that refused him, then he will go to another shop and give THEM the money instead... so it makes economic sense to be as open to customers as possible, other wise you're missing out on potential profit...

    I don't think the courts should be able to FORCE a cake business owner, for example, to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. The business has a right to choose who it serves

    1|3
    0|0
    • It's so nice to hear people that a common sense. 🖒

    • I agree with @liamgall95. But I take that one step further because I will not spend my money at a business that refuses service to LGBTQ people. If a business can decide who they want to serve based on the owner's personal morals and values, then I will decide where to spend my money based on my personal morals and values.

  • They can have whatever view they want to have. But, there are rules by which business is conducted. I know of no place in the civilized world in which people are free to conduct business any which way they like. Nor has it ever been the case since the advent of the firm. So, I have no problems whatsoever telling a business owner what they can and cannot do. I see it as a separate issue from personal liberty.

    That said, I would certainly not give business to someone or an organization that discriminates against the LGBT community. That's my discretion as a consumer. It's ironic that the people who beat the drums of capitalism the loudest are the same who constantly try to subvert market forces in pursuit of their own religious ideals.

    1|0
    0|0
    • I say "religious ideals", but let's be frank here - we're not talking about religion. We're talking about a story made up to gloss over the fact that these people simply want to discriminate and get away with it.

  • That really depends upon both how you define descrimination, and the extent you believe government should be allowed to interfer in private enterprise.

    Just because I may disagree with your lifestyle doesn't necessarily make it discrimination.

    If a white supremacist asks a black owned bakery to bake a cake celebrating white supremacy for their upcoming racist party, does the black baker not have the right to reject service?
    Can the government truly force the hand of a private business, or the beliefs of it's owners?

    The same logic can be applied to a religious baker refusing to bake a gay couples wedding cake.

    In both situations rejection of service isn't necessarily discrimination. And if the government does interfer it is their acknowledgement of the rights of one over the other.

    Instead if being offended and crying "discrimination or bigotry" try excercising your opinion with your wallet by taking your business elsewhere.

    1|2
    2|0
    • I feel like your comparison is flawed. A black person would reject making a racist cake because it is not only offensive, but attacking them personally. Your essentially comparing homosexual people to whie supremacists. Gay people are born the way they are and hurt noone. White supremacists hate people purely for the colour of their skin.

    • Show All
    • So what you're saying is that gay people aren't inherently gay, they just represent immoral lifestyles?

    • No Gypsy, I wasn't talking about gay people
      I was talking about the bakery situation.

  • I would not. That's that. We vote with our dollars and have every right to vote how we choose. If society doesn't want to vote for racism and bigotry we don't have to.

    1|0
    0|0
  • In America you can't discriminate against black people so I don't see how LGBT people are any different.

    3|1
    0|0
  • Yes because restricting someones views is totalitarian, plus you don't know why they did it, maybe they did it for religious reasons? I myself as a religious person wouldn't want to cater to say a gay wedding.

    Plus you can't please everyone, someone is always gonna get hurt no matter what. And if a bakery or something denies you service then just simply go to another.

    2|2
    0|0
  • No I wouldn't give my business to any business that discriminate blatantly against any group but that said I would have a common sense qualifier of customers not looking for trouble - Like if I was organising a same sex wedding and wanted a cake with two grooms on the top tier, I know their will be trouble if go to the fundamentalist religious bakery which is four doors down from a secular bakery.

    1|0
    0|1
  • Oh look, the acronym has grown again.

    Anyway, no an employer shouldn't be able to refuse someone work IF their decision is based on the fact that their candidate-employee is LGBTQI. In every other case, they totally have the right to do that. But also, hey, how the fuck are you gonna know what their true motivation is, unless they just hand it to you? So that makes this discussion rather pointless.

    Of course I'd give a job to someone who has the tendency to discriminate, as long as he/she doesn't exhibit this tendency on the workplace. Other than that he/she can do whatever they fucking want in their free time.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Allowing a business to refuse service to LGBTQ is a tricky line to cross. If it's a private business then it stands to reason that the owner is entitled to his beliefs. In the USA most of our stores carry a sign right on the front door stating that "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." Of course, this policy has been successfully challenged in a great many cases.

    However, I am in favor of allowing businesses to make such policies and stand by them. Frankly, I want to know which businesses are run by fucktard assholes. I would rather see such businesses put big red signs on their front doors stating that "We are hateful bastards." If they are forced to hide their prejudice, then how do we discern the truth? How do we know to avoid giving them our money? I would rather see them revel in their hate and go the hell out of business as a result.

    0|1
    0|0
    • I agree, but then I also think, "will these businesses become places where bigoted or intolerant people can get together, and then worsen the situation?" Like a less hardcore version of KKK meetings lol.

    • If that happens then you simply reverse tactics. The crowd that is being ostracized needs to show up in huge numbers, every day, making it as uncomfortable as possible for the haters who gather there. Always make a purchase, the cheapest thing sold, of course. You want to be a paying customer else they have a reason to boot you out. But make a fuss, show up in droves, and watch the "regular" crowd stop patronizing that establishment. Then, once they've giving up on their little refuge, feel free to stop shopping there.

  • This is a more complex issue then your question or poll is suggesting.
    I am pro individual, if the individual is discriminated against based on there sexual preference that is not acceptable. HOWEVER, i am NOT for special treatment due to the same standards.

    If someone from the LGBQTI movement is threated like any other and then gets upset about it BECAUSE they are LGBQTI identifying individuals they have no right to speak. What is also totally fine is a business ruling out LGBQTI behavior if it does not fit there company code. It is entirely the company's right to dictate how you act within the company's time (Within reason) and it is your right to leave them if you disagree.

    Simple example, lets say there is a nice cafe. People come here to relax, enjoy good food and have a good time. Some of the customers dislike people who act extremely gay and find it distracting and obnoxious. This is common in the area of the cafe despite people being ok with sexual preference.

    3 People apply for a job, two are gay one is straight.
    The first person is gay, but acts completely normal in public. His preference isn't obvious and he goes by his normal day to day life.
    The second person is straight, also acts completely normal in public and goes by his normal day to day life.
    The third person is gay, but is extremely obnoxious about it. He walks more feminine then girls do, talks with the typical accent and keeps referring to himself as a gay individual.

    In this case the company would not be wrong to rule out the third guy even if he is otherwise a qualified waiter. If the cafe wants to portrait a certain professional image (Perhaps its a very luxorious cafe) it can be requested to put aside this image of yourself and act professional especially on your jobb interview. The same way i wouldn't show up in a band shirt or act extremely hyper because i am just like that. It wouldn't fit there image and rightfully so.

    As you noticed its much more about behavior then sexual preference, i wouldn't mind a company with a reasonable behavioral code but i would mind a company which would have denied the gay individual purely based on being gay even when its not obvious.

    0|0
    0|0
  • The problem with the current vote in Australia is a bit deeper than if you support 2 blokes or Sheilas hitching up or not and I think you should point that out to foreigners of your country. If it were just a matter of them marrying, I don't think it'd be an issue at all... it's what's entailed with the way that law is being passed. Basically it would become unlawful to not reserve any rights to not serve nor to have the opinion at all.

    Here in the U. S. we have this thing you guys don't really have... freedom of speech. Sure our left is trying to take freedom of speech away from us under the guise of hate speech, but we didn't really have any issues voting to legalize their gay marriage rights. "So now I get to say two butt thumbers got married, which one's the girl?"... and I don't go to prison for my bad jokes.

    It won't be the same, unfortunately, for you unless it gets specified.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes I would give business for sure as when making any sound business decision no one should ever affect that business decision based on what color of the persons skin is, the persons religion or what their personal beliefs are and if the individual should be gay, a lesbian or LGBT that is their business and none of mine.

    I had a professor in college years ago as I was at a seminar I had attended and he has made a statement that stayed with me for years and I used his method all the time to become successful and the professor said, "When conducting any type of business the first thing an individual is to do is remove all emotions and personal feelings as it will cloud or taint your judgement and set you up for failure"...

    0|0
    0|0
  • Businesses are entitled to refuse service to anyone but refusing it to a specific group is discrimination however if it's a question of morals I don't know how I feel about it. If someone's just like "hey I can't make you a wedding cake it's against my faith/morals" I'd be like ok and move on even as a straight man I wouldn't feel discriminated against if a gay couple refused to make me a cake for my straight wedding. Now if they refused to make me a birthday cake just cause I was straight/gay then I'd feel discrimination

    0|0
    0|0
  • The objection is not based on a person's orientation, but in participating in an act that is objectionable.

    There is a difference.

    1|0
    0|1
  • As long as it's a private business and the business doesn't refuse the costumer some human needs. Private business should have the right to do with their business what they want. And if a business decides they will only treat mormons, then so be it. That's why its a private business.

    The moment government interfers with the decision of private business owners, those businesses aren't privately owned anymore, but only administrated - since the government then took away the liberty of ownership.

    Government should naturally stay neutral. Aka official agencies, etc. have no say in this.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Though i don't agree with it, private businesses should be allowed to run their businesses any way they see if. Now with that being said, these same businesses should deservedly incur the wrath of the consumers if they decide to discriminate against people for any reason. Won't make a wedding cake for gay marriages? Cool. I'll just broadcast for all the see, and let the court of public opinion handle the rest.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Yeah why not, LGBT is of no concern to me, if i need something from a shop and they are the cheapest shop, i'm going to buy it.

    Anyway business should have the right to refuse service to anyone they want for whatever reason they want. If they're willing to take the monetary hit from excluding a portion of the customer base, then that is on them. There's always someone else willing to sell.

    0|0
    0|0
  • All businesses should have the right to serve or not to serve whom ever they please. And if i don't agree with who you serve or not serve I won't go to ur buisness. Discrimination is stupid. If I choose to say I only go to businesses that serve lgbtqi people then i discriminate against those other businesses.
    Discrimination:the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Personally I just live and let live, yes inequality sucks but businesses should have the right to refuse whom ever they want because it's their freakin buisness but you could probably make a good assumption about how long that business is going to last if they keep discriminating against people. I hope all that came out right.

    0|1
    0|0
  • so every 6 months you ad a letter?
    last time I checked it was only LGBTQ and before that it was only LGBT.
    and yeah I will never have any relationship with someone who is proud to be asking or fighting for these "rights"

    0|2
    1|0
    • Thats okay, they wouldn't want to be with you anyway.

    • what a relief, that makes me so happy
      thank god I wouldn't have to ask every new one about their stance

  • If I like their products they produce better than other competitors then I will keep using their product

    0|3
    0|0
  • I personally do not think that government should be involved in marriage. if they're not willing to punish an adulterer and they shouldn't be regulating who does or does not get married. that being said I don't believe people should be forced to work. if a person really just likes another person regardless of the reason they should have all right to back out of the work. I guess it depends on the business because if it's a bar that doesn't want it serve gay people well I think that's messed up and would take my business elsewhere because I feel like it's hitting them as a person. if it's like a bakery not wanting to do a wedding I feel like it's not agreeing with the act of the marriage. so I guess it depends on if they are hating the person because they are gay or if they did fundamentally disagree with the actions of them being gay but could care about the person.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No, I am LGBTQI

    1|1
    0|0
  • I do not discriminate against anyone. If you're gay, I really don't care. We're not going to be best friends or anything but, that said, I'd patronize your business and if there was a local business in the area that did not deal with homosexual people, I wouldn't deal with them. I don't care about what they do just like they don't care what I do.

    0|1
    0|0
  • refuse business because of gender belief? sounds like 21st century apartheid at this point...

    2|0
    0|0
  • In any case, why would you want to work with people that rejects you?

    1|0
    0|0
  • More from Guys
    79

What Girls Said 57

  • Personally I wouldn’t continue using their services based on something like that, but I’m hesitant in choosing what side of the law that should lie on.
    I’m all behind lgbt and support everyone’s right to their relationship. But I feel that making private business put aside their own beliefs in certain circumstances is wrong - but my opinions are too specific it kind of makes it silly lol.
    Like I support a bakery declining a gay wedding cake as it goes against the bakers religious beliefs.
    But I don’t support a bakery declining service at all to a gay man wanting to buy lunch.
    So I guess where the service is specifically contributing to something a private business feels an ethical dilemma, they should be free to decline business

    2|2
    0|0
  • Tbh I think it's stupid, on their part, to let this kind of personal opinion affect a business's profits. Gay money is still money. And how would they even know? Are gay couples going to need a special kind of identification? But whatever. Morals over money, or whatever.

    That being said... If they had a product i want or a service that I want, then i would do business with them regardless of their opinions. As long as it doesn't interfere with the quality of the product or service they're providing me.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Well. First of all a business isn't always about resale of a physical good or labor. Someti rd business is about providing ideas speech art etc. I do not believe any person has the right to force someone else to convey a certain idea or message. So for instance should a black baker be forced to provide a cake whose theme is white supremacy to the kkk. I say no. Same for a Christian baker. If I were a Christian baker and a gay couple came to me to design bake and provide a c a ke would that couple really want my ideas about gay marriage as part of their wedding? I'd respect them enough to say that they don't want my product because it isn't a good match.

    0|1
    0|0
    • There's a serious problem with that argument: the group that you'd be asking the black baker to serve is actively insulting him for being what he is. A gay couple isn't necessarily doing that. I mean if they were actively insulting Christianity at the wedding then the baker might have a case but not if it was just a gay wedding. So a more fitting analogy would be if someone had a religion that said black and white marriages were an abomination and refused to provide service to such a wedding on that basis. You listen to Shapiro a lot don't you?

    • Show All
    • @Ad_Quid_Orator your rationale doesn't even stand to logic. You keep going back to this logic that an idea is a commercial barter. The issue at hand and before the scotus is a first and fourteenth amendment issue not a universal commercial code question that you are trying to make it out to be. The Scotia will rightfully rule in favor of the baker. Now the rightful response from the gay community and their supporters should be to not do business with this guy and give it to someone else. Fair enough.

    • If he's refusing to provide a good or service (a cake, drill bit or singing voice) to someone that he would sell to someone else then it does fall under the rules of commercial barter and that's basic logic. As for the gay community, they should go after him as they should with anyone who would provide people a good or service because of their protected status.

  • If I was aware of their bigotry, no, I wouldn’t give them business. They can have their opinions - I don’t have to support their livelihoods in the process. Fair is fair.

    1|0
    0|0
  • No, you can't refuse services to LBGT people, any more than you can refuse to serve someone because they're black.

    Any company that thinks otherwise deserves to be boycott.

    1|1
    0|2
    • So if I may ask, what is your opinion on women-only gyms, as they flatly refuse service to people based on their gender?

    • @Alessus Good point. The antagonists would probably argue that they are womens' gyms in order to benefit the women (similar to gender scouts or gender golf clubs or even gender locker rooms). Not baking a cake for a gay couple doesn't benefit them. I totally agree with you though. I find it bizarre how people are so influenced by the virtue signaling ideology. It's very pervasive to where we are numb. The desire to bee seen as not hurting feelings has more power than almost anything right now. Logic doesn't apply.

  • Oh wow. Let me say that not all christians don't associate with lgbtqi people, that's a stereotype but some do don't associate and I do confess I fall into that stereotype back in high school but not anymore, some do associate with them which I think are the real or mature christians because we can still respect and love them as long the line isn't crossed over for each Christian, not all Christians have the same opinion on what's too far lol. For the cake business, I'm guessing it crossed their line of belief because they think they are supporting their lesbian marriage if they do the cake so that gets blurry. If I were the cake owners, I would have done their cake because I respect that community and I do think all adults have the right who to marry besides family of course and it doesn't bother me unless their design does but I discriminate any design that crosses my line because i can't be ok with all or any design i'm not ok with. All businesses are allowed to refuse service within reason, dang I sound like a hypocrite or bigot lol here is an example of logic -- someone wants me to print "God sucks"on shirts, that I would refuse because it goes against my belief and I can't be part of that in spreading that kind of lie. I hope this makes sense, respect and right to opinion are the points here

    0|0
    0|0
  • They can't refuse service to people of color or differing religions or cultures. Why should they be allowed to refuse service to LGBT people?

    As a matter of fact, they can't refuse service NOW. Why would the law be changed to ALLOW discrimination?

    1|1
    0|1
  • Yes, because it’s a double sided discrimination. If a business can’t cater to a same sex wedding because of their religion that is 100% justified, so who is LGBTQI people to BE THE ONES who discriminate against their religion if their all about “support every race, religion, sexuality” slogan, they should respect that other people have religions that go against them. So definitely yes.

    0|3
    0|1
  • I dunno... I'm bi so obviously I'm not too happy about giving money to people who believe that my sexuality is wrong or a sin or any of that bullshit... But I am also very morally flexible when it comes to money unfortunately :P If I am aware that a business wouldn't support me and I can get a similar product for a similar price elsewhere, then I'll go elsewhere. If I'm going to be getting a crappy product or the same product for a ridiculous amount more, then I'll still shop there.

    1|0
    0|0
    • I'm bi, too. And it's me, the other Les Mis fan again. Anyways, yeah, if they are truly unethical, I'll boycott. But rich college kids getting triggered over chicken sandwiches are dumb as hell

  • gay and lesbos just cry crry and cry. they have the same rights as others.. the fact is that they provoke and fish for attention.. and yeah i would give business.. its business not charity...

    1|2
    1|0
  • Fuck no. Its their right but its my right to not give money to a corporation that is actively trying to hurt me. And no one act like people like me are ridiculous, if a business was trying to stop white straight christians from being able to marry or be free in public they would lose hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Yes because they have a right to choose to except it or not. I'm bi. I still talk and give people who don't support me the same respect I give anyone else.

    0|4
    0|0
  • What people do in their bedroom is none of our business. I can understand a church refusing to marry a gay couple. A for-profit business should not refuse to offer service to a person just because their legal lifestyle contradicts some people's opinions. I'm black and I've had racist people serve me!!!

    1|0
    0|0
  • there is a difference between predjuduce and discrimnination . sadly predjudice contains
    three components of attitudes = the affective . the cognitive . and the behavioral .
    whereas discrimination involves behavior . conduct and overt action .
    being predjudice is bad enuf . i admit it . i have my predjuduces .
    but as a person with prejduices i do not *act* out my inner personal and private attitudes by my
    outward conduct or behaving against others with acts of discrimination . that is disgusting .
    anyone who acts upon their predjuduces by taking actions or speech of discrimination against
    anyone . or supports others having the right to act out their discrimination against others
    is equally disgusting . if by god religion nationality culture color or sexuality, when you
    discriminate you are inhuman and disgusting . your god and your scripture made a mistake .

    s1.postimg.org/1iywkbcqe7/zzdiscriminate01.png

    the united states constitution says in the 1st amendment - Congress shall make NO LAW
    respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; blah blah blah
    however it can be argued . and i don't know why it never has been . that when state laws
    are passed against same sex marriage that are based on religious and/or moral principles .
    that is in effect the establishment of a religion and a religious concept . specifically the religion
    of christianity against same sex marriage . this is against the constitution because the law
    against same sex marriage IS essentially and unequivocal the establishment of a religion
    and a religious belief based on a religon's principle . because if and since the law also prohibits
    the free excercise of a gay couple from buying a wedding cake it is therefore discriminatory
    and unlawful . and is obviously an illegal law and an unconstitutional law . blahblah done .

    0|0
    0|0
    • I agree. There is a big difference between holding a belief (which everyone is entitled to) and acting upon it so that is hurts others.

  • I personally am not against the LGBTQI as they should be able to enjoy life as anyone else should. That said YES I would give my business to someone who viewed it differently and refused to serve them. If a private organization or business wants to refuse them service that also should be their right as well.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I support LGBTQ and I support same sex marriage.. but private businesses should not be forced to make something they don't want to... it's their right. we as customers have the power of money, we can not go there for their services and that's enough.. they should not be pushed by gov to make something they don't want to

    1|0
    0|0
  • If its because of religion that you dont want to serve those in LGBTQ community just remember, its not your place to judge, God will. And your God says to love everyone.

    2|1
    0|0
  • Depends if it's like, Chick Fil A saying they prefer traditional marriage, or actual discrimination. Chick Fil A still serves anyone, but they have their religious beliefs

    But throwing someone out of their restaurant for being gay? No. And I am disturbed by Salvation Army's anti-gay policies and only paying disabled employees literal slave wages. Disabled people don't get the same minimum wage, much the same as undocumented workers

    0|0
    0|0
  • I'm going to keep my opinion out of this other than the pole. However, I do think it can hurt businesses to be so outspoken about political beliefs in general. In Gatlinburg there were stores head to toe decked out in Trump and confederate flags. It definitely deterred me from shopping there. If it was the same store without all the stuff and still had the same beliefs but didn't throw it out there it's likely they would have had my business.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No! Why the heck should that be allowed? How is it fair that I can't get a job at some place just because of my sexuality, something that I CAN'T CHANGE. It's the same as denying someone a job because of their race.

    1|1
    0|4
    • Because it's a private business? Why should the government dictate how you run your own business. If a business would choose to do this then it's the consumers can just boycott the company.

    • Show All
    • I think that you are speaking for your self correct? But the way you stated is that all of us should wouldn’t or couldn’t refuse whatever it is you’re saying which is just plain wrong you can speak for yourself but you can’t speak for us

    • @jimmijo1954 I've talked to other lesbians. I know how it works. In 2014 there was a study done to see whether or not our genes played a role in sexuality. The study involved drawing blood from 409 homosexual brothers and heterosexual members of their families. An analysis confirmed that an area on the X chromosome (which men inherit from their mothers) known as XQ 28 has an impact on sexual orientation. Another stretch of DNA on chromosome 8 also affects male sexual behaviour.

  • Yes I would.
    Everyone should get a chance of employment. But if a person discriminates against LGBTQI people then strict action will be taken against them. Such attitude shouldn't be tolerated. If there isn't any improvement in their behaviour, then they should be fired.

    0|0
    0|0
  • "C" For Cause... I do Not Discriminate against Anyone under the Sun, hun, for Any of whatever Cause they may Feel with their Deal. xx

    0|0
    0|0
  • I honestly think that's stupid. It's not as if people have signs around their necks staying what their sexuality is. And it's not as if someone who is gay is any different in any way than someone who is straight, aside from who they like.

    0|0
    0|0
  • If it is common knowledge or posted on the store front that they discriminate against LGBTQI then no I would not.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Being against human rights isn't a acceptable difference of opinion, it's being evil.

    1|0
    0|3
    • It's not a human right to be served at a private owned business just because you are gay, straight, white, black, Asian or whatever. They can freely take their money else where, where they are wanted.

    • Show All
    • Exactly. Someone has just as much choice in being LGBT as they do in being black.

    • I think this is where the diversity of opinion stems from: people thinking being gay is a "lifestyle choice" rather than apart of how they were born.

  • I don't understand how people refuse service to certain people. On one hand it's just a business and the people running are entitled to their opinion I understand that. But on the other hand that's losing possible customers simply they identify with something you don't agree with. It's honestly rather stupid in my opinion for anyone refuse service to someone simply of their sexuality (or race, religion as well). That's less money in their pocket.

    0|1
    0|1
  • I don't think people should be forced to give service if it's against their beliefs. In their eyes they may think they are sinning against God to serve a gay person because that's what they were taught to believe. I dont agree with that belief but I wouldn't force them to go against their belief. Another example is businesses that won't hire someone because they have pink hair. I think it's wrong but it's their right. And I would only not use someone's service if they personally did something wrong to me or someone I care about.

    0|0
    0|0
  • If they add one more letter to that then you might as well just recite the alphabet.

    And personally, I support that community in the sense that they should have the same rights but I'm not going to debate with a religious person on why they need to accept the LGBT community. It's very clear in religious books that gay is bad to them and who am I to lecture them on their beliefs. You can still treat someone with respect while disagreeing with their lifestyle & choices. As long as that's happening, I don't disagree.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Wouldn't not serving LGBTQI people be disrespecting them? Wouldn't the respecful (and intelligent) thing to do be to do business with them and keep your opinions private?

  • @lizheart not at all. I disagreed with you. You are saying he should not “discriminate” against a restaurant because it’s within their rights to not serve certain people. He has every right to not support a restaurant that does things he does not agree with.

    0|0
    0|0
  • A business owner can do what they want but it seems pretty stupid to limit who they earn a living from. I’d opt to not give them my money.

    0|0
    0|0
  • More from Girls
    27
Loading... ;