Sunday, October 28, 2012

Not Hateful but Still Harmful

Personally, I have nothing against the Treworgys nor do I have any sympathy for them. They put up a political sign and now they are upset with the consequences their support for "No on 1" has caused their business. Some seem to think that refusing to visit or buy products from their farm is somehow an act of discrimination that should not be allowed. That's utter nonsense. The very implication is horrifying. How can you force private citizens to buy specific products or services from any business? The various individuals who express support for the Treworgys also tend to mix the idea of the rights individuals are, and should be, afford with businesses. Despite some of the more ideologically driven decisions of are pathetic Supreme Court, business (Corporations or others) are not human beings. If someone decided to target the couple for their opinion that would be a different matter. No one is seeking to deny the Treworgys any services or rights.

Of course, the article also touches on another misguided and foolish notion that I have commented on in previous posts. A person or group does not need to be hateful to do others harm. I don't have any reason to doubt what the couple have said about not being hateful. Ultimately, it does not matter. They are still supporting an effort that itself is designed to restrict and/ or deny the rights of our fellow citizens. By its nature that is harmful. "No on 1" is about continuing to treat homosexuals as second-class citizens. You can come up with any manner of justifications and excuses, all of them quite feeble, but it does not change the underlying principle. Opponents are seeking to deny other the very rights that they themselves enjoy. It is despicable.

No comments:

Post a Comment