It's post number one hundred on this little site here and I found myself looking for something really good to talk about. Unfortunately nothing came up in my search, BP continued to pop up, German millionaires volunteering to a Rich Tax, sixteen year old lost at sea... Many interesting topics, but none that jumped out at me, none I felt I could really discuss. Then I found an article, it's topic one I've discussed a few times before, and interestingly enough... I may find myself on the other side.
You see I still don't know how I feel about this story. Up in British Columbia an elderly couple is under fire and being taken to court for discrimination. It seems that they run a Bed and Breakfast, and refused to allow a gay couple to stay in their home. They're Christian and feel that allowing the two men to share a bed in their house would conflict with their personal religious beliefs. It seems at first glance that this is barely an issue, these people are clearly in the wrong, right? Well, I don't know.
We can easily see the counter argument here, that the fact that the two men are gay really shouldn't effect the couple's beliefs in any way, this is a business relationship, and the two men are customers. By refusing to serve them they are in fact pushing their beliefs onto other people, which is generally a bad business practice. I have to wonder to myself if they would allow someone of a different faith into their home, someone Jewish, Muslim, or perhaps a belief system that works with Witchcraft like Wicca. Would these things, that cannot be told about a person without asking, be something the couple wouldn't allow into their home?
I don't think this is really about discrimination, because if it is there's no argument, the couple is blatantly discriminating. I'm more along the lines on whether or not they should be penalized for it. I know, you're thinking I've gone mad, but here me out. Here in the States, a private organization or business can refuse service to anyone as long as it goes against the bylines of that business practice or organization. It's this reason that the Boy Scouts of America can refuse membership to gay, Jewish, or Atheist boys. They're personal bylines state that they feel these attributes do not go along with their own beliefs, and the government cannot force them to accept those people. They should be forced to on the fact they they accept government money and land, but that's a different story.
But how far does this go I wonder? I remember reading a story years ago about a woman of strong faith working at a pharmacy that refused to give out any form of birth control. Now due to her religion, she felt that selling this product would be along the same lines of supporting it... Now this is where the line seems to blur slightly doesn't it? This is a woman of faith, a faith that must be respected, if not agreed with. Wouldn't forcing her to sell Birth Control be intolerant of her beliefs? But she works in a Pharmacy, this is her job... She is being paid by a company to sell their product. Where does the line fall?
Should these people be forced to accept business from a Lifestyle they do not morally agree with, or should they be allowed to run their private business as they please? It's an issue I find myself on the fence with, for as much as I think the couple is wrong for believing what they do, I'm not about to ask the government to force them to think the way I do. But where do the rights of the customers take hold then? They're being refused service based on something they cannot control, which is flat out unfair. Though even if they were able to stay there, they'd be staying at a Bed and Breakfast where the hosts are quite obviously uncomfortable with them, which I think would ruin any real enjoyment of a vacation.
This issue has me waning on my own thoughts, I see the civil rights issue, but I also see the private business issue. I feel myself leaning more towards the civil rights, as I do see business as something that should be static and free of personal beliefs, especially when offering a service to many people, some who will undoubtedly be people you do not find fit with your personal beliefs. But as of now, the B&B is closed, and there seems to be some legal precedent for both sides of this case, and I'm not sure I'll be happy with either side winning.
What do you believe?
2 comments:
Now, I'm not knowledgable of Canadian laws so maybe it's allowed up there, but I can say without any doubt whatsoever that if it were happening here in the United States then that B&B should be quite heftily fined. You CAN NOT mix personal beliefs with professional practices. If you want to use the same loophole that the Boy Scouts do then so be it, but if you don't then the ADA kicks in and you must follow it. Rules are rules whether you like them or not, and if you don't then you need to follow the established procedures for changing them.
And apparently we're on the same side on the subject of the Boy Scouts, you and me. If you're going to use government resources then you need to follow government rules. It's the same reason I was disgusted to hear that a private Christian college here in Florida had successfully changed to a state-funded university while keeping the requirement that all students must go to chapel. Oh wait, I'm sorry, students aren't required to go to chapel, they just get their grades docked a few points if they don't.
Man, this is one of the hardest lines to draw I've seen brought up in some time. Simply I believe if your beliefs are going to put you in an obviously comprimising position you should probably avoid that kind of public service.
If you're going to play the game then you have to follow the rules. Simply put. That being said... I'm still kind of on the fence on this one.
-VR
Post a Comment