I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. I’ve never done any ghost writing so that’s an interesting question. I don’t have the Civil Rights Act memorized but in general, I think the litmus test is that you can refuse service, for example, but not for a discriminatory reason. In other words, if someone who scared you because of their erratic behavior walked in to your bakery, you would be within your rights to ask them to leave, because there is no law protecting that class of people. Part of the problem with gay rights is that they are somewhat protected in some places, but it’s pretty uneven. They are not a universally protected class, such as with gender or race.
And who is to determine if actual legal discrimination has taken place? The courts, I guess, but in the absence of clearly defined legal boundaries, that becomes tricky. It’s true that gay activists can be intolerant, although as someone who has been on the receiving end of discrimination (gender) I tend to give them more leeway. Again, harkening back to civil rights era — those guys who sat at the lunch counter in Woolworths in Greensboro, NC were being rude and disruptive by the standards of their time. They were being unreasonable and didn’t leave when they were asked to. Today we consider them heros…….. I’m not so sure that being reasonable in the face of discrimination is really to be applauded. If you’ve read any of my recent posts along these lines, you’ll see that’s where my head is at, at least right now anyway.
And I still totally agree that it’s not a clear cut white hat/black hat kind of thing, but few things actually are.