Choosing not to make a cake because you don't like it's content, is not the same as choosing not to serve the customer because you think/know they are gay. A business has the right not to create a product it does not want to create. It does not have the right to decline service to a person, under the assumption that serving that person is the same as creating a product.
The Religious Freedom Law makes the assumption that providing the same service to an LGBT person that you would a straight person, is somehow supporting LGBT lifestyle. It is not. It is supporting business with humans.
What if I'm a gay cop in Indiana, do I have the right to refuse service to a shop known to reject gay patrons? What if I'm a gay ambulance driver, can I refuse to help the guy who publicly refused to serve me earlier that day in front of my crew? What if I'm a gay water works official? Gay firefighter?
These businesses operate on the national, public stage. Gay people are part of the national public identity of our country, a part of the very fabric of society. Why should these business owners have the right to force the LGBT community to work for them, via public service that benefits all Americans, utilize the safety of our police and emergency services, survive thanks to our public works - all of which involve the support of people whoa re not a part of their religion, race or sexual creed - and then reject, publicly, a subsample of our population?
I see a lot of comments saying "Well just don't shop there", but there are plenty of real-life reasons why a person might not have other options - too young, old, firmly rooted or poor to move, limited vehicle access... what if you're driving through Indiana, your car breaks down, the only mechanic for a hundred miles decides you must be a queer with that haircut and refuses to fix your vehicle? His shop doesn't exist in a vacuum, it exists because LGBT soldiers fight to protect it, LGBT road crew employees paved the roads that bring him custom, LGBT factory employees built the cards he repairs. These business owners exist thanks to America. They shouldn't be allowed to reject a chunk of America under the assumption that "it will sort itself out".
The way it sorted itself out was with riots, speeches, marches - the civil rights movement, which is obviously still ongoing, and I'm shocked to see so many people argue against civil rights. People who are not a part of your religion, race, and sexuality HELPED GET YOU WHERE YOU ARE. They are a part of the great nation that you subsist upon. They are your fellow Americans, and America does not discriminate.
This site (I have not confirmed this data) claims 4 million people were "tech-savvy" enough to download Game of Thrones from torrent sites. Downloading a cracked game is literally just as easy, the instructions for each crack are included in the torrent that you get from the same site using the same search function.
So if 4 million people downloaded Game of Thrones, I think it's safe to bet that over 3 million would have downloaded something like SimCity.
Of course, whether those downloads equate to lost sales is a different matter - I think most of those 3 million would have bought the game if that was the only way to access the online social functions. If EA had simply offered them as a feature instead of a requirement, I don't think they'd have any problems right now.
All the bitching, bad reviews and angry gamers in the world don't mean a thing to the business people at EA. All they care about are the sales figures. Numbers.
SimCity is a legacy seller, casual buyers will still be picking it up from Wal-Mart shelves in five years, and EA knows that. A few weeks of internet tantrums don't mean a thing to them. You have to show them, with your wallet.
Every angry gamer who actually bought a copy of the game and then bitched about it just made it better for EA and worse for the gamers. We all knew better, and many of you bought it anyway.
Your bitching doesn't matter. Your buying it did.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Djinnx.
Re: Question
The Religious Freedom Law makes the assumption that providing the same service to an LGBT person that you would a straight person, is somehow supporting LGBT lifestyle. It is not. It is supporting business with humans.
(untitled comment)
These businesses operate on the national, public stage. Gay people are part of the national public identity of our country, a part of the very fabric of society. Why should these business owners have the right to force the LGBT community to work for them, via public service that benefits all Americans, utilize the safety of our police and emergency services, survive thanks to our public works - all of which involve the support of people whoa re not a part of their religion, race or sexual creed - and then reject, publicly, a subsample of our population?
I see a lot of comments saying "Well just don't shop there", but there are plenty of real-life reasons why a person might not have other options - too young, old, firmly rooted or poor to move, limited vehicle access... what if you're driving through Indiana, your car breaks down, the only mechanic for a hundred miles decides you must be a queer with that haircut and refuses to fix your vehicle? His shop doesn't exist in a vacuum, it exists because LGBT soldiers fight to protect it, LGBT road crew employees paved the roads that bring him custom, LGBT factory employees built the cards he repairs. These business owners exist thanks to America. They shouldn't be allowed to reject a chunk of America under the assumption that "it will sort itself out".
The way it sorted itself out was with riots, speeches, marches - the civil rights movement, which is obviously still ongoing, and I'm shocked to see so many people argue against civil rights. People who are not a part of your religion, race, and sexuality HELPED GET YOU WHERE YOU ARE. They are a part of the great nation that you subsist upon. They are your fellow Americans, and America does not discriminate.
(untitled comment)
Re:
This site (I have not confirmed this data) claims 4 million people were "tech-savvy" enough to download Game of Thrones from torrent sites. Downloading a cracked game is literally just as easy, the instructions for each crack are included in the torrent that you get from the same site using the same search function.
So if 4 million people downloaded Game of Thrones, I think it's safe to bet that over 3 million would have downloaded something like SimCity.
Of course, whether those downloads equate to lost sales is a different matter - I think most of those 3 million would have bought the game if that was the only way to access the online social functions. If EA had simply offered them as a feature instead of a requirement, I don't think they'd have any problems right now.
(untitled comment)
SimCity is a legacy seller, casual buyers will still be picking it up from Wal-Mart shelves in five years, and EA knows that. A few weeks of internet tantrums don't mean a thing to them. You have to show them, with your wallet.
Every angry gamer who actually bought a copy of the game and then bitched about it just made it better for EA and worse for the gamers. We all knew better, and many of you bought it anyway.
Your bitching doesn't matter. Your buying it did.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Djinnx.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt