# Are Americans kind of forced to support LGBT standpoints? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 4, 2018, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430 "2018-06-04T20:36:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/301 "2018-06-12T21:19:10Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > So you want the government to compel his participation in the wedding (yeah, I know, you don’t believe designing and creating a cake is in any way participation in the wedding). I was a chef and a caterer. I catered quite a number of weddings. I did not participate in them. When my best friend got married, and I was in the wedding party, I did participate in that wedding. > [@](#): > > What’s the point of beliefs if you don’t act on them? To make you feel better about your actions, usually. > [@](#): > > Try this logic exercise. We have this sentence: > > _What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally, regardless of your belief of the inferiority of others._ > > You’re saying the “qualifier” _regardless of your belief of the inferiority of others_ can alter _What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally_. So let’s look at the possible values of _belief of the inferiority of others_. It can be > [ul] > [li]others are inferior[/li][li]others are not inferior[/li][li]some others are and some others aren’t[/li][/ul] > and let’s substitute > [ul] > [li]What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally, since you believe others are inferior.[/li][li]What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally, since you believe others are not inferior.[/li][li]What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally, since you believe some others are inferior and some others aren’t inferior.[/li][/ul] > In all cases, you believe the government should be in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally. The phrase _regardless of your belief of the inferiority of others_ means its doesn’t matter what my belief is. You are trying really hard to try to play some sort of semantic game here, and if you feel that I poorly worded something that caused you confusion, I apologize, and I will try to communicate better to you next time. The reason for the “regardless” part, is to show that yes, you do have to treat them equally, even if you don’t want to. Even if you really, really don’t want to. Whatever meaning that you have tried to twist it into in order to justify a bigot’s position is a game that I have no interest in playing. > [@](#): > > The same logic applies to Miller’s post (unless you’re arguing that Miller meant there are all kinds of other characteristics other than race, religion, gender, or sexuality that allow you to not offer your service to a member of the public like height or facial hair). Well, yes, Miller is fully aware and cognizant that there are many reasons why you may refuse service, which is why he posted a non-comprehensive list of some of the things that you may not refuse service over. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/302 "2018-06-12T21:29:37Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > The lingusitic gymnastics that bigots go through to try to claim that they’re not bigots is pretty amazing. “He’s not a homophobe, he just thinks that gay people getting equal rights is wrong! You’re such a meany to put that label on him when he just wants to deny gay people basic civil rights!” I guess I missed the part where this guy immediately contacted all the local cake shops and told the proprietors not to serve them or else, organized protests against the upcoming wedding, and then flew to Massachusetts in an attempt to have Massachusetts’ marriage laws changed before they could get married. He views designing and creating cakes as part of the celebration of marriage (you may not). He believes same-sex marriage is wrong. He declined to participate (but did tell them he’d sell them anything in the shop). Some time ago we reached the tipping point that disapproval of any action or behavior of some subset of our society earns you the sobriquet [subseta]phobe. It’s simply not possible to have a set of values, principles to mediate the inevitable conflicts, and then live your life by them. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/303 "2018-06-12T21:39:27Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > To make you feel better about your actions, usually. Some people try to live their lives using their beliefs to help them. It’s clear you have beliefs. Or is fear of government action the only reason you don’t discriminate? > [@k9bfriender](#): > > You are trying really hard to try to play some sort of semantic game here, and if you feel that I poorly worded something that caused you confusion, I apologize, and I will try to communicate better to you next time. > > The reason for the “regardless” part, is to show that yes, you do have to treat them equally, even if you don’t want to. Even if you really, really don’t want to. Whatever meaning that you have tried to twist it into in order to justify a bigot’s position is a game that I have no interest in playing. So, in essence > [@](#): > > What the government should be in is in the business of ensuring that everyone is treated equally. There’s no trick here. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/304 "2018-06-12T21:50:17Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Some people try to live their lives using their beliefs to help them. It’s clear you have beliefs. Or is fear of government action the only reason you don’t discriminate? I also don’t discriminate because I believe that treating everyone equally is the best way to work towards a world that I want to live in. But yeah, govt regulations reminding me of what my obligations are as a public accomodation are not entirely without use. There are others with different feelings towards the matter, and they feel as though discriminating against people is the best way to work towards a world they want to live in. In those cases, I am glad that the government prevents them from acting in that fashion. > [@](#): > > So, in essence > > There’s no trick here. But everyone is not treated equally. I don’t need to treat the person that bounced a check on me last week equal to the person who always pays their bills in full. I don’t have to treat the person equally that brings in their matted mess of a dog every 8 months the same as the person who brushes their dog and comes in every 6 weeks. I don’t have to treat the person that cursed at me because they didn’t like their dog’s haircut the same as a person who thanks me and tips me for it. I certainly do not treat cat people the same as I treat dog people. It is treating them differently, based on arbitrary “beliefs” that one holds about the client, that the government needs to prevent. I’m here in Ohio, so I don’t have to treat a homosexual the same as I would treat a heterosexual, but I choose to, because to do otherwise would be to do harm to them, to my community, and ultimately, to myself. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/305 "2018-06-12T21:55:54Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > He views designing and creating cakes as part of the celebration of marriage (you may not). Slightly digressing, that attitude in itself seems rather creepy to me (assuming it’s genuine and not merely asserted in order to bolster his religious-freedom legal defense). If I were buying a wedding cake, I would not consider some hired batter wrangler to be taking part in the celebration of my marriage, and I would be displeased if he intimated that he was regarding himself in that light. I’d consider it intrusive and presumptuous. He’s a commercial artisan selling me a product, not someone invited to share in a personal event important to me. What’s next, furniture salesmen thinking they’re a meaningful part of a bridal couple’s consummation of marriage because they sold the couple a new bed? Ew. > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Some time ago we reached the tipping point that disapproval of any action or behavior of some subset of our society earns you the sobriquet [subseta]phobe. It’s simply not possible to have a set of values, principles to mediate the inevitable conflicts, and then live your life by them. Sure it is. Someone would have to be a very fragile snowflake indeed to think that being labeled a -phobe somehow made it impossible for them to maintain what they consider their values. In any case, you’re wrong that “disapproval of any action or behavior” necessarily results in the -phobe label. People who disapprove of behavior such as smoking in public or animal abuse or street crime don’t get called smokeophobes or abuseophobes or crimeophobes. The -phobe label signifies, as in “germophobe” or “agoraphobe” etc., that the “disapproving” party is having a strong negative reaction to something that is a demonstrably normal and natural part of life. If you’re having a strong negative psychological reaction to something that’s a natural part of life and isn’t objectively harming anyone, it’s not unreasonable to default to considering that reaction somewhat pathological, on par with a mild form of phobia. It’s certainly not society’s responsibility to treat your denial of other people’s equal rights as just a neutral “set of values” or “principles”. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/306 "2018-06-12T23:05:49Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Slightly digressing, that attitude in itself seems rather creepy to me (assuming it’s genuine and not merely asserted in order to bolster his religious-freedom legal defense). > > If I were buying a wedding cake, I would not consider some hired batter wrangler to be taking part in the celebration of my marriage, and I would be displeased if he intimated that he was regarding himself in that light. I’d consider it intrusive and presumptuous. > > He’s a commercial artisan selling me a product, not someone invited to share in a personal event important to me. What’s next, furniture salesmen thinking they’re a meaningful part of a bridal couple’s consummation of marriage because they sold the couple a new bed? Ew. That’s fine. But you’re not him. > [@Kimstu](#): > > Sure it is. Someone would have to be a very fragile snowflake indeed to think that being labeled a -phobe somehow made it impossible for them to maintain what they consider their values. Hopefully you’re posting this in response to my failing to add “without be labeled.” You do seem to believe that the government should compel behavior in conflict with their values. I don’t. > [@Kimstu](#): > > In any case, you’re wrong that “disapproval of any action or behavior” necessarily results in the -phobe label. People who disapprove of behavior such as smoking in public or animal abuse or street crime don’t get called smokeophobes or abuseophobes or crimeophobes. > > The -phobe label signifies, as in “germophobe” or “agoraphobe” etc., that the “disapproving” party is having a strong negative reaction to something that is a demonstrably normal and natural part of life. If you’re having a strong negative psychological reaction to something that’s a natural part of life and isn’t objectively harming anyone, it’s not unreasonable to default to considering that reaction somewhat pathological, on par with a mild form of phobia. But I know of no -phobes related to people that are in common usage that have a generally agreed upon positive connotation. And excellent pedantry. > [@Kimstu](#): > > It’s certainly not society’s responsibility to treat your denial of other people’s equal rights as just a neutral “set of values” or “principles”. I don’t want the government choosing. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/307 "2018-06-13T01:11:17Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Once again, characterizing the motives of people in the vilest way. Everything I’ve heard about the Colorado case indicates the baker was cordial. It seems if you can’t even conceive that some people have deeply held beliefs and they strive to live their lives in accordance with those beliefs. Lots of people have lots of deeply held beliefs, like for instance the sincere and deeply held belief that black people are genetically inferior to whites and should not be permitted to eat in the same establishments or allowed in the same hotels. If I’m “disparaging” to bigots it’s because bigots have been responsible for some of the worst ugliness and inhumanity that man has ever inflicted on his fellow man. There is zero justification for tolerating bigots in an enlightened and civilized world. > [@Pantastic](#): > > The lingusitic gymnastics that bigots go through to try to claim that they’re not bigots is pretty amazing. “He’s not a homophobe, he just thinks that gay people getting equal rights is wrong! You’re such a meany to put that label on him when he just wants to deny gay people basic civil rights!” He does it cordially, too, don’t forget. :rolleyes: > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > You do seem to believe that the government should compel behavior in conflict with their values. I don’t. Once again, any system of laws necessarily “compels behavior”, and laws are necessary for the functioning and the very existence of civilized society. But governments don’t have “values”; people do. Democratic governments are the agents and the servants of the people. > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > I don’t want the government choosing. Your extreme paranoia of government, which comes up in almost every single post, is duly noted. Some of us see government as the bedrock of civilization. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/308 "2018-06-13T01:39:10Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Lots of people have lots of deeply held beliefs, like for instance the sincere and deeply held belief that black people are genetically inferior to whites and **should not be permitted to eat in the same establishments or allowed in the same hotels**. Bolding mine. It’s so convenient when you forget to mention that this was compelled behavior by - yes, you guessed it - governments. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Your extreme paranoia of government, which comes up in almost every single post, is duly noted. Some of us see government as the bedrock of civilization. I have no paranoia of government. I simply don’t believe this is a government function. You’re under this delusion that whatever progress we’ve made since the end of the Jim Crow era has do do with some huge government effort. I see an evolving society and preventing governments from enacting laws that compel discriminatory behavior. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/309 "2018-06-13T05:57:30Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Bolding mine. It’s so convenient when you forget to mention that this was compelled behavior by - yes, you guessed it - governments. No, I haven’t forgotten anything. This is the most amazing backwards logic that I’ve come across in a very long time. Is it your contention that local governments in the American south were responsible for racism? That they just appeared out of nowhere and for some unknown reason institutionalized racism in the south? Were the former Confederate states in the 19th century American south a happily fair and egalitarian society for all the resident black people until the danged Evil Government came along and ruined it all with Jim Crow laws? No? Then your attempt to blame “government” for racism is worthless and deceptive. The actual proactive role of government here with regard to racism was largely non-existent until 1964, at which time its effect was to start the long process of trying to counteract deeply entrenched barbaric racism, especially in the south, with guarantees of equal human rights for all. > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > I have no paranoia of government. I simply don’t believe this is a government function. So you have no paranoia of government, you just believe government shouldn’t be allowed to do anything. > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > You’re under this delusion that whatever progress we’ve made since the end of the Jim Crow era has do do with some huge government effort. I see an evolving society and preventing governments from enacting laws that compel discriminatory behavior. Perhaps you haven’t heard of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or the one in 1968, or the massive efforts to enforce it in bigoted backwaters, and perhaps you haven’t heard of affirmative action and a plethora of government programs to help disadvantaged minorities get a leg up in the world, and to try to educate the public and move society forward. Society doesn’t necessary evolve spontaneously – sometimes government leadership is helpful or necessary, and sometimes without leadership it evolves in unproductive ways. But social leadership can never be good in your book, because it involves the government doing things, and that shouldn’t be allowed. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/310 "2018-06-13T06:38:56Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Sure, but it’s not really relevant unless you’re trying to argue that an employer has no business making you do anything that the law doesn’t explicitly require you to do. In which case, ho-lee shit, there ain’t gonna be a lot of work getting done. It is very difficult to discuss this when you leave out very pertinent points I made about what you JD says, what company policy says, etc. > [@](#): > > My point, which **you** seem to be not seeing, is that what underlies “following the law” about equal rights for black people and, as you put it, “supporting the cause” of equal rights for LGBT people is exactly the same principle. Nope. If the law says that all people are equal then you essentially have to treat them that way. Stop acting like I haven’t agreed to this. If you look at some of the IBM links I posted earlier, they put out a statement supporting legislation against human trafficking. I applaud them on such a controversial subject. That being said, if I was an IBM employee I would not expect to be told to go stand a picket line at the UN or similar activity supporting their statement. I would expect to be asked to do so and expect no penalty if I said no. > [@Pantastic](#): > > The lingusitic gymnastics that bigots go through to try to claim that they’re not bigots is pretty amazing. “He’s not a homophobe, he just thinks that gay people getting equal rights is wrong! You’re such a meany to put that label on him when he just wants to deny gay people basic civil rights!” Are you sure he is the one saying equal rights is wrong or just parroting what he thinks his god wants him to do? He may have no issue with gay people and want to serve all his customers, but who is he to say that god is wrong or even question him? And are not religious types a protected group? ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/311 "2018-06-13T16:00:46Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > He views designing and creating cakes as part of the celebration of marriage (you may not). **He believes same-sex marriage is wrong.** He declined to participate (but did tell them he’d sell them anything in the shop). The belief shown in bolded statement alone shows that he is homophobic. All of the other verbal dancing is irrelevant to the fact that he believes gay people don’t deserve civil rights. It’s really that simple. > [@](#): > > Some time ago we reached the tipping point that disapproval of any action or behavior of some subset of our society earns you the sobriquet [subseta]phobe. It’s simply not possible to have a set of values, principles to mediate the inevitable conflicts, and then live your life by them. No, your claim is completely and absurdly false. It’s disapproval of people’s basic right to exist, or of them having things like civil rights including things like marriage and the right to participate in general commerce. It’s not possible to have a set of values that includes something like ‘black people aren’t allowed at my lunch counter’ or ‘gay people shouldn’t be afforded civil rights’, and not be considered a bigot, but it’s the specific bigotry in your ‘values’ that is the problem, not having values in general. > [@Uzi](#): > > Are you sure he is the one saying equal rights is wrong or just parroting what he thinks his god wants him to do? He may have no issue with gay people and want to serve all his customers, but who is he to say that god is wrong or even question him? And are not religious types a protected group? Yes, he is clearly the one saying that equal rights is wrong. Even if you’re ‘parroting’ something that someone else said, you are still saying whatever statement it is that you are ‘parroting’, that’s what the word means. The contention that ‘he doesn’t actually have a problem with gay people, he just believes that an invisible being told him he has to act like he has a problem with gay people’ is flat-out stupid and nonsensical. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/312 "2018-06-13T16:19:47Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > No, I haven’t forgotten anything. This is the most amazing backwards logic that I’ve come across in a very long time. Is it your contention that local governments in the American south were responsible for racism? That they just appeared out of nowhere and for some unknown reason institutionalized racism in the south? Were the former Confederate states in the 19th century American south a happily fair and egalitarian society for all the resident black people until the danged Evil Government came along and ruined it all with Jim Crow laws? No? Then your attempt to blame “government” for racism is worthless and deceptive. The actual proactive role of government here with regard to racism was largely non-existent until 1964, at which time its effect was to start the long process of trying to counteract deeply entrenched barbaric racism, especially in the south, with guarantees of equal human rights for all. Large segments of the society were racist and used the power of government to compel the behavior they desired. The courts were complicit. At the national level, the Brown decision started the process of dismantling the various schemes that had been implemented in many areas of the country. Prior to that, there were many efforts to overturn these state laws but the Supreme Court turned them back when they got that far. Many states in the North acted unilaterally but were hamstrung to some degree by the Supreme Court. Also, there are still racists. They just can’t use the government to compel others to behave in the manner they want. > [@wolfpup](#): > > So you have no paranoia of government, you just believe government shouldn’t be allowed to do anything. > > Perhaps you haven’t heard of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or the one in 1968, or the massive efforts to enforce it in bigoted backwaters, and perhaps you haven’t heard of affirmative action and a plethora of government programs to help disadvantaged minorities get a leg up in the world, and to try to educate the public and move society forward. Society doesn’t necessary evolve spontaneously – sometimes government leadership is helpful or necessary, and sometimes without leadership it evolves in unproductive ways. But social leadership can never be good in your book, because it involves the government doing things, and that shouldn’t be allowed. So you think a bunch of politicians, with their heightened moral sensibilities, scheme to get elected under false colors so they can unleash the plans that they and their fathers and their fathers’ fathers have been working on for centuries - no, millennia. I think we grow as people and drag the government behind us. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/313 "2018-06-13T16:27:39Z")
So - to answer the OP’s thread title in one word - are Americans “kinda forced” to support LGBT standpoints, yes or no? ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/314 "2018-06-13T16:28:08Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > I think we grow as people and drag the government behind us. Glad you can finally acknowledge that we’ve grown as a people and now we want to enshrine in the government that the LGBTQ community cannot be descriminated against. Well, glad that’s resolved. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/315 "2018-06-13T17:12:55Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > Glad you can finally acknowledge that we’ve grown as a people and now we want to enshrine in the government that the LGBTQ community cannot be descriminated against. Well, glad that’s resolved. Exactly, compel other’s behaviors just as the racists did! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/316 "2018-06-13T17:57:39Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Exactly, compel other’s behaviors just as the racists did! Will no one think of the poor bigots?? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/317 "2018-06-13T21:22:16Z")
> [@MemoryLeak](#): > > Exactly, compel other’s behaviors just as the racists did! I’m not sure what you’re getting at. You explicitly said that with respect to racism, we as a people grew up past it and dragged the government along. So you’re ok with people getting over racism and dragging the government along with it, but not ok with people getting over homosexuality and dragging the government along with it? Or are you saying that anti-racism laws should never have been enshrined in the government at all? Your argument seems pretty inconsistent and doesn’t make a lot of sense. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/318 "2018-06-13T22:09:14Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > So - to answer the OP’s thread title in one word - are Americans “kinda forced” to support LGBT standpoints, yes or no? To answer in lots more than one word, if we are all being forced to support LGBT standpoints, that force is _far_ from universally effective. So “yes” to “there’s some amount of social pressure that encourages people to be decent to each other”. And “no” to “that pressure actually _forces_ people to do so.” It’s that “kinda” that muddles things up. Gravity _kinda_ forces me to stay firmly on the ground, but I can still jump, and given the right equipment, fly. ---
**Author:** ![MemoryLeak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@MemoryLeak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MemoryLeak)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/319 "2018-06-13T22:30:51Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > I’m not sure what you’re getting at. You explicitly said that with respect to racism, we as a people grew up past it and dragged the government along. So you’re ok with people getting over racism and dragging the government along with it, but not ok with people getting over homosexuality and dragging the government along with it? Or are you saying that anti-racism laws should never have been enshrined in the government at all? Your argument seems pretty inconsistent and doesn’t make a lot of sense. We decided that we would no longer tolerate local and state governments enacting laws that compelled discriminatory behavior. If you could point out some locality that has laws in effect that compel discrimination against homosexuality (and there have been some in the recent past), then, hopefully, someone’s got a plan to violate that law in a controlled fashion so that it can make its way through the legal system to be ruled unconstitutional, overturned, sent back to the legislature, whatever. I simply believe that the government should not compel people to perform services that conflict with their religious beliefs and the government should not compel speech or expression by someone. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2018, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430/320 "2018-06-14T00:15:18Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > So - to answer the OP’s thread title in one word - are Americans “kinda forced” to support LGBT standpoints, yes or no? No. The answer is “no”. The notion of “kinda forced” conflates this with the fact that ever since the modern civil rights era, it’s been getting tougher for bigots to practice their bigotry. They have become increasingly frustrated with laws and changing social mores that consider the groups they wish to discriminate against to be human beings with human rights. Why, it’s getting to the point that a bigot can hardly refuse to do business with these groups or refuse to be in their presence, or disparage them with traditional slurs, without being regarded as a bigot! > [@MemoryLeak](#): > > I simply believe that the government should not compel people to perform services that conflict with their religious beliefs and the government should not compel speech or expression by someone. At the risk of repeating myself, you appear to be believe that government should not be allowed to do _ **anything** _, and especially not get involved in social issues like the guarantee of basic human rights. Over in post #263 you rail about “government compelled behavior” and “thought crimes”, and how “only the government can compel discrimination”. In #306 you opine on the denial of other people’s equal rights: “I don’t want the government choosing.” Not surprisingly, these are all libertarian code words expressing, not any principle of human rights or justice, but a blanket condemnation of government, the extremist version of the libertarian delusion that society will be just fine without the government enforcing basic human rights and basic justice and equality. But the reality is that these foundational values are far too important to leave to some vague hope that maybe a lawless society will be just fine, particularly since it never has been and never will be. If there’s one thing we can learn from history it’s our very long record of prejudice and intolerance against those who are different, one of our more ignoble reptilian tendencies that goes far back to pre-history. The difference in civilization is that societies exist under government and the rule of law, not a lawless free-for-all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-americans-kind-of-forced-to-support-lgbt-standpoints/815430.md?page=17)