Make anti-LGBT businesses publicly post their policy.

[MrFun]

Why does Kid not want consumers to be able to make informed decisions?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think Mr. Fun needs to wear a "gay badge" at all times so that businesses can know that he is gay and therefore be able to refuse to serve him properly

[Pedotard]

I think Mr. Fun needs to wear a "gay badge" at all times so that businesses can know that he is gay and therefore be able to refuse to serve him properly

Good idea. Also, Jews should be legally required to wear a yellow star of david shaped patch. I don't think that violates the concept of freedom of association so it's okay.

[MrFun]

I think Mr. Fun needs to wear a "gay badge" at all times so that businesses can know that he is gay and therefore be able to refuse to serve him properly

How is what you're saying the same thing as forcing businesses to publicly post their anti-LGBT policy?

There's no justification to compel me by law to wear a "gay badge" because my being gay has no effect on other people. A business who provides service to me that might be anti-LGBT, without knowing that I myself am I gay, suffers no negative consequences.

Businesses with anti-LGBT policy though, does have an effect on other people. Why should LGBT customers not be protected from humiliation and grief by being able to be informed ahead of time of which businesses they can go to, and which ones they cannot go to?

[Aeson]

I think Mr. Fun needs to wear a "gay badge" at all times so that businesses can know that he is gay and therefore be able to refuse to serve him properly

a) he probably does
b) apples and oranges

[Pedotard]

How is what you're saying the same thing as forcing businesses to publicly post their anti-LGBT policy?

There's no justification to compel me by law to wear a "gay badge" because my being gay has no effect on other people. A business who provides service to me that might be anti-LGBT, without knowing that I myself am I gay, suffers no negative consequences.

Businesses with anti-LGBT policy though, does have an effect on other people. Why should LGBT customers not be protected from humiliation and grief by being able to be informed ahead of time of which businesses they can go to, and which ones they cannot go to?

Because you don't have a right to never be offended?

Unless they make wedding cakes they don't even need to know you're gay.

[pchang]

There's no justification to compel me by law to wear a "gay badge" because my being gay has no effect on other people.

You are clearly making Kid and Imran feel all "icky" inside.

[Imran Siddiqui]

a) he probably does
b) apples and oranges

I'm just fighting ridiculousness with ridiculousness here.

And you are probably right about a)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Good idea. Also, Jews should be legally required to wear a yellow star of david shaped patch. I don't think that violates the concept of freedom of association so it's okay.

How is what you're saying the same thing as forcing businesses to publicly post their anti-LGBT policy?

There's no justification to compel me by law to wear a "gay badge" because my being gay has no effect on other people. A business who provides service to me that might be anti-LGBT, without knowing that I myself am I gay, suffers no negative consequences.

Businesses with anti-LGBT policy though, does have an effect on other people. Why should LGBT customers not be protected from humiliation and grief by being able to be informed ahead of time of which businesses they can go to, and which ones they cannot go to?

Why do you not want businesses to be able to make informed decisions?

[Aeson]

I'm just fighting ridiculousness with ridiculousness here.

And you are probably right about a)

There is nothing ridiculous about requiring businesses to post their customer service policies, terms of service, or privacy policies. In many cases it's already law.

[Imran Siddiqui]

There is nothing ridiculous about requiring businesses to post their customer service policies, terms of service, or privacy policies. In many cases it's already law.

Businesses in the US can refuse to serve anyone for any reason unless it is related to a protected class (race, gender, etc - sexual orientation isn't a protected class yet in most states). They don't have to post it up.

Now one can say that Religious Freedom acts are redundant in those states that don't have sexual orientation as a protected class.

[Aeson]

Businesses in the US can refuse to serve anyone for any reason unless it is related to a protected class (race, gender, etc - sexual orientation isn't a protected class yet). They don't have to post it up.

Of course they don't have to post up what protected classes they discriminate against ... it's illegal to discriminate against them at all.

If it were legal to discriminate against say, mixed race couples, would you support a law that required such businesses to be clear about their policy? Or would you want to protect the bigots who wanted to first draw in mixed race couples to their establishment so they could throw them out?

[Kidlicious]

Why does Kid not want consumers to be able to make informed decisions?

Not many care. For those that care they can ask.

[Kidlicious]

How is what you're saying the same thing as forcing businesses to publicly post their anti-LGBT policy?

There's no justification to compel me by law to wear a "gay badge" because my being gay has no effect on other people. A business who provides service to me that might be anti-LGBT, without knowing that I myself am I gay, suffers no negative consequences.

Businesses with anti-LGBT policy though, does have an effect on other people. Why should LGBT customers not be protected from humiliation and grief by being able to be informed ahead of time of which businesses they can go to, and which ones they cannot go to?

What does your lifestyle have to do with my Chicken?

[Kidlicious]

You are clearly making Kid and Imran feel all "icky" inside.

MrFun is a good guy.