DaddySatyr
Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011 From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky Status: offline
|
I would never be on board with any public sector services being denied for just about any reason (obviously, there are some extremes that people could nit-pick about; the easiest ones would be gender-based). I do think there are some dis-incentives that could be offered that might have little effect but, they might have huge effect. I need to pick a really far-out example but I'm doing that to eliminate some of the aforementioned nit-picking. If we allowed ... GM to refuse to do business with a dealership owned by a gay person, that's pretty despicable but, when the new military contract for vehicles came up (not just combat equipment but also all the cars used by all the "officials" in the military), we would ban them from bidding on that government contract. Also, forget about them asking for another government bail-out. Now, this has to be specific; not that GM refused to do business with someone that was selling dented cars as new that just happens to be gay. Their reasoning has to be something along the lines of: "We don't want to appear to be promoting homosexuality". I think that choice is a great thing but, the consequences of those choices shouldn't be eliminated.
< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 3/24/2014 9:49:44 PM >
_____________________________
A Stone in My Shoe Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me? "For that which I love, I will do horrible things"
|