Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy
I really dislike this thought process. It downplays the struggles of people who aren't the majority by making out that we must appease the majority and that's wrong.
What you are endorsing is appeasement.
|
Appeasement to you maybe. However, for me I consider that examples of compromise and respect for another person's cultural practices. Two
very different ways of grounding and engineering a perspective. Not only was their position there domineering, but it is maliscious and cruel to force other people to trash their private practices in order to force their own way. Life is all about give and take. We can't just take take take anytime we feel disrespected or like we're entitled something. That's how we've come to this point in our culture, is this lack of humility on both ends, which has led us to this point where we've politicized every issue rather than finding new ways to not only tolerate the other, but build a bridge.
This couple could have gone to a different baker. It would have shown some real skin/maturity for them to have taken the high road here, but they expect empathy without giving any in return for the position they put the baker in. Securalism may be on the rise, but those who adhere devoutly to their their religious vocation can't simply drop practices willy-nilly. We can't separate the action of the baker from his private practice... unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, any religion. Simply put, this is a regressive move for our society when there's little to no room for respecting the private practices of other people's cultures/way-of-life. Whatever respect they may claim to have otherwise is pretty much conditional. We will find no agreement here as I see this as simple bigotry disguised as a pursuit for "tolerance"/justice...