Direct Donation


Thank you for your support!

Subscribe to The Indie Game Magazine

Order now!



Joomag

Magster

The Armed Traveler


Click above to purchase!
Discount Code for $2 off: SQWTN2013

Want to Advertise?

Please email me for pricing and terms!

Gun Blog Black List

Regarding Arizona (quickie)

I have a few words, and a NSFW video.

Gun owners, you vote with your wallets, do you not? When a place isn’t friendly to gun-owners, you just…don’t go. If you can find an alternative that’s friendlier and more willing to either promote or just be completely apathetic toward gun owners (I’ll take apathy over aggression any day), you go there, instead. Easy.

And WHY do you do this? Because the owner of a company has the right to provide or deny service to any individual for any reason. They are not obligated to serve you, just as you are not obligated to go there for service.

If they cite religious reasons for not wanting to serve a person who isn’t heterosexual? OH, WELL. It’s their loss, financially…and it’s their right to observe their religion as long as it doesn’t come at the direct expense of another (just like it’s our right to carry within the law as long as we don’t hurt anyone else). Your feelings being hurt, or you getting angry? That isn’t a valid reason to try to deny someone of a right…just like it’s not a valid reason to strip us of gun rights.

If you’re for gun rights, but you’re against religious freedom, you might need to look at your priorities, again. Until someone does something that ACTUALLY hurts you (instead of hurting themselves…which, let’s face it, that’s all this bigotry will amount to), just leave it alone and fight the battles the way we are with other things: by not being jerks, by networking, and by showing that people are PEOPLE, whether they’re gay, straight, gun-owner, religious, whatever. You don’t win people over by yelling at them. You do it by giving them space, recognizing their viewpoint, and slowly but surely introducing yours until they wedge themselves into a corner.

If they never get into that corner, THAT’S NOT YOUR PROBLEM. Live your life. Let them live theirs. Take your business elsewhere. LISTEN TO JBDUBS:

10 comments to Regarding Arizona (quickie)

  • I am 100% in agreement. LO, LET US HAVE UNPOPULAR OPINIONS TOGETHER.

  • I respect the reasons for this legislation being passed. After all the very basis of freedom is the right to choose who you will and will not do business with. I’m OK with businesses refusing to do business with people who hold views they have issue with for whatever reason. I’m also OK with those businesses going under because their views cost them customers and made it difficult to hire employees.

    Supporting freedom needs to be something we do regardless of our personal views. e.g. I may not like anti-military protesters, but I respect their right to say not nice things about myself and many of my friends.

  • Matthew House

    I want people to be legally allowed to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Let em hang signs that say ‘no allowed’. Seriously. I want peoples racism, bigotry, fear and stupidity to be perfectly legal.

    Because I’m gonna open a shop next door, selling the same good and/or service, with a great big sign that says “WE SERVE EVERYONE!” And then I’m gonna make a friggin -killing-.

    lets allow stupid people to cut their own throats, please?

  • Sigivald

    My problem with the legislation there is not that it’s anti-gay (the text doesn’t mention sexuality at all), or that it lets people act like bigoted jerks (freedom of association means precisely that is protected).

    It’s that the bill only allows for religiously derived freedom of association to be protected.

    Remove the clause putting the basis in religion, and let anyone refuse to serve anyone for any reason, and I’ll applaud it.

    (Mr. House explains cogently why Big Discrimination is not a threat to e.g. minorities getting served*, and indeed, is a self-defeating strategy even without boycotts.

    * I recall a quote from the Jim Crow era, possibly from Rev. King, along the lines of “a black man’s money is as green as a white man’s”. No matter who said it or how I mangled it, the principle works. That’s why Jim Crow Laws were laws, because otherwise all actors had a great incentive to defect from discrimination.)

    • People with tattoos, shaven beards, and any number of other features would also be refused service in some establishments, yes. The only reason I made this about homosexuality is because that’s what everyone else is harping about.

      I do agree, though, that if this wasn’t based in religion, it would be a better law. However, would that make it easier or more difficult to pass?

  • Let the marketplace decide.
    You don’t want to serve Blacks, gays, women, short people? Fine don’t.
    Watch your business wither and die.

    gfa