You may think that it is wrong to withhold services to someone because you disagree with their lifestyle, and that disagreement may rise to the level of a religious conviction.
In Christianity (somewhat unique among the major religions), a major tenet is "hate the sin but love the sinner."
Is it wrong then to withhold your services?
From a crass commercial, economic standpoint, it's a rather silly and short-sighted thing to do, and I think there's little disagreement on that point.
But those errors in judgment (if they are errors in judgment) pale in comparison to the vitriolic, frenzied, mindless hate spewed towards anyone who dares to make those rather minor errors.
Threatening someone with social ostracism, shunning, and violence is an entirely different, and more serious level of social transgression than is simply withholding services to someone you do not wish to serve.
Also, Starbucks coffee sucks. That's why you need all the cream and sugar in it to choke it down.
* "Social Justice Warrior": An officious, overbearing, busybody of a mindless knee-jerk leftist twit who has an overwhelming need to feel superior to others by being more "sensitive" or "tolerant" than the next guy, or gal . . . and expresses that sensitivity and tolerance by being astonishingly intolerant and insensitive. They treasure "respectful conversations" which they then define as agreeing with them 100%. If you do not, you are a racist, sexist, homophobe, "worst person in the world," etc, etc.
You've noticed that posting has been . . . sporadic here? Yeah, about that . . . what's to say, really? The entire world is spiraling out of control, out of sanity, descending back into the dark pit of human excess. The deep, dark pit from which the long climb of rationality had, from ancient Greece through the best traditions of Christianity, the Reformation, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the American Experiment, for a shining moment, lifted the human race to a better place.
It has saddened me beyond words to realized that most people have looked at that better place and said "No, thank you, we prefer the dank darkness of the pit."
We have a President who truly believes that "because I said so" is a valid governing principle.
We have a media whose fondest wish is to be thought kindly of by that President, and so has absolutely no interest in investigating any of his administration's transgressions and illegalities.
We have an opposition party whose fondest wish is not to oppose that President, but to be thought kindly of by that media.
We have paid shills among us who try their damnedest to shout down anyone who says an untoward word about the President.
We have fellows among us who mindlessly mouth the bromides of the paid shills because that is all they've ever heard, and take visceral offense at any person who dares to utter an "offensive" thought in their presence. And they find nearly everything offensive, and attack the "offender" in the most vicious manner they think they can get away with.
The climb was long. The fall has been sudden. It seems that the only hope now is that we don't fall all the way down to the bottom.
The only reason for Obama's veto is his radical, far-left "progressive" ideology of forcing Americans to pay higher prices for energy because of their unshakable belief that "the environment" is more important than actual, living people.
I do believe that the current occupant of the office of President of the United States, and all of his supporters, have perhaps misinterpreted the spirit of the season.
Peace on Earth. Goodwill towards Men. Crush and destroy Republicans wherever you find them. Merry Christmas! Happy Kwanzaa! Death to Conservatives! Fight the Power (ignoring of course the fact that the so-called "progressives" ARE "The Power".)
Here's an idea. For one day--for one hour--for one minute, give it a *censored* rest, okay?