Fallout for North Carolina's LGBT law

Roxxsmom said:

Evidence that boycotts can have an effect. Something to point out next time any of encounter a concern troll who insists that boycotts are a form of "censorship" that don't work anyway when the person saying this really doesn't agree with the reason for the boycott.

Click to expand...

And "bullying." You are apparently a bully if you don't spend money in certain places you don't approve of.

Alessandra Kelley said:

Another argument to watch out for is the "How terrible to punish an entire (state / sports league / whatever) when so many people there disagree with the law you're punishing them for. You're hurting nice people as well as the naughty."

Click to expand...

When I lived in CO I told friends and family to boycott away. It sucked that Boulder, a town that mostly voted against Amendment 2, was punished along with the rest of the state, but that's what happens sometimes.

This argument against the boycott is similar to the one I had to deal with a while back was a friend telling me that not shopping at Wal Mart because I hate their corporate policies and politics is hurting the poor people who work there. Yes, I suppose it is, but it's not like I'm not going somewhere else to buy the stuff I could have bought there. So I'm helping the folks who work at Costco, or Target (or wherever) instead. I don't see why I should feel guilty about that, any more than I feel guilty for choosing one store (or product) over another for non political reasons.

There's something about boycotts that really ruffle the feathers of some conservative types. Which is odd, since there are few things more economically conservative in principle than a boycott. Many of my conservative friends insist that we shouldn't pass laws to regulate corporations or businesses and instead let consumers decide what they want to purchase. Isn't a boycott doing just that?

Roxxsmom said:

There's something about boycotts that really ruffle the feathers of some conservative types. Which is odd, since there are few things more economically conservative in principle than a boycott. Many of my conservative friends insist that we shouldn't pass laws to regulate corporations or businesses and instead let consumers decide what they want to purchase. Isn't a boycott doing just that?

Click to expand...

Social conservatism and fiscol conservatism often times bump heads in the mind of some republicans. They want people and companies to vote with their money, but get upset when they do that for a seemingly liberal cause. Then it becomes about looking for excuses why some specific boycott is wrong, but the idea of consumers deciding is still right.

Celia Cyanide said:

And "bullying." You are apparently a bully if you don't spend money in certain places you don't approve of.

Click to expand...

I'm bullying America, then. Because my partner and I have sworn off stepping foot on its soil for at least four years. We will reassess our bullying tactics after the next election. Shame, too. We spent a good portion of September in Sedona...and I fell in love. I just can't. So...colour me bully.

Feeling somewhat safer but just as poisoned in Canada.

Alessandra Kelley said:

It seems pretty clear that many people who say there should be fewer regulations and instead the market should decide don't generally mean what they say.

If they meant what they said, they would accept that consumers getting together to boycott harmful companies, or petitioning the government for better protections or even regulations, is a legitimate market action.

Click to expand...

Considering that I've had conservatives who are against the Civil Rights act insist that they despise racism and homophobia and reeeely, truuuuly believe that the good white, straight folks of small town America will shun their local diner or bakery that refuses service to Black people or LGBTQ people, it's pretty clear that they have incredible faith in the free market and in the willingness of people to inconvenience themselves in the name of social justice.

At least they do if it's an excuse for "smaller government."

But when liberals actually step up to the plate and expose unsavory practices and organize a boycott, they (the conservatives) get all frothy and scream "censorship" or "bullying," or resort to various forms of concern trolling about the effect of the boycott on innocents. Of course, they also hate it when the courts rule that some discriminatory law is unconstitutional (because, by golly, the people voted, and that's democracy, and to Hell with the Constitution), because they evidently only believe in checks and balances that go their way.

We all do it to some extent: believe that government is working when it does things we approve of and that it's broken when it doesn't. But the whole "freedom to discriminate" thing is (imo), at best, an examine of worshiping a principle to the detriment of actual human beings. At worse it's a thinly veiled attempt to return us to a time and place where discrimination and segregation were norms accepted by nearly everyone who wasn't victimized by such (and even by many who were).

For that matter, excuses not to boycott change with the wind and seem to follow no logic, which can lead one to suspect that the *reasons* given don't actually matter, all that matters is stopping boycotts.

Click to expand...

Or at least stopping the ones they don't agree with.

Boycotting is perfectly legitimate form of protest. I do it all the time, in particular, charities that employ chuggers and lavish their donations on executive pay.

WriterDude said:

Boycotting is perfectly legitimate form of protest. I do it all the time, in particular, charities that employ chuggers and lavish their donations on executive pay.

Click to expand...

This is one of my go-to boycotts.

With McCrory leaving the governor's office (and allegedly heading for Trump's team) and Cooper coming in, the NC GOP has started action towards a blatant power grab.

After calling a surprise special session, Republican lawmakers who control the General Assembly introduced measures to end the governor’s control over election boards, to require State Senate approval of the new governor’s cabinet members and to strip his power to appoint University of North Carolina trustees.

Republicans also proposed to substantially cut the number of state employees who serve at the governor’s pleasure, giving Civil Service protections to hundreds of managers in state agencies who have executed the priorities of Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican.

Click to expand...

Maggie Maxwell said:

With McCrory leaving the governor's office (and allegedly heading for Trump's team) and Cooper coming in, the NC GOP has started action towards a blatant power grab.

Click to expand...

Well, the current governor proved to be a real problem, so this is obviously for the protection of the people. (tic)

Yep. Looks like they hammered out some kind of deal; Charlotte city council rolled back the now-nullified LGBT protections and the legislature is coming back into ANOTHER special session tomorrow to theoretically repeal HB2. I don't trust it.

Roxxsmom said:

Considering that I've had conservatives who are against the Civil Rights act insist that they despise racism and homophobia and reeeely, truuuuly believe that the good white, straight folks of small town America will shun their local diner or bakery that refuses service to Black people or LGBTQ people, it's pretty clear that they have incredible faith in the free market and in the willingness of people to inconvenience themselves in the name of social justice.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think a lot of people see discrimination as an isolated thing. They think it's just a matter of having one bakery in a town full of bakers refuse to bake a cake for you, and don't see the big deal.

But civil rights laws exist because it's not always an isolated thing. Black people in segregated states faced real difficulty and daily indignities. That's why laws had to be enacted. It reminds me of anti-vaxxers in a way--people who haven't personally seen what can happen and feel immune to it don't always appreciate why prevention matters.

DancingMaenid said:

Yeah, I think a lot of people see discrimination as an isolated thing. They think it's just a matter of having one bakery in a town full of bakers refuse to bake a cake for you, and don't see the big deal.

But civil rights laws exist because it's not always an isolated thing. Black people in segregated states faced real difficulty and daily indignities. That's why laws had to be enacted. It reminds me of anti-vaxxers in a way--people who haven't personally seen what can happen and feel immune to it don't always appreciate why prevention matters.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. It's about far more than inconvenience of having to drive to the next town to get a wedding cake or eat out (though that's bad enough).

It's also likely that passing laws that make private discrimination into a legally protected right again will foster an environment that makes such discrimination feel more normal or okay to many people.

And there's a question I've had for the people who insist that they deplore bigotry and discrimination but feel that there's a larger principle here that they support. Do overarching principles (such as so-called religious freedom or the "right" of a business or property owner to be allowed to refuse service, housing, or employment to anyone for any reason) really trump any and all horrific outcomes at both the societal and individual level?

edutton said:

Yep. Looks like they hammered out some kind of deal; Charlotte city council rolled back the now-nullified LGBT protections and the legislature is coming back into ANOTHER special session tomorrow to theoretically repeal HB2. I don't trust it.

Click to expand...

Considering North Carolina was the ONLY state that crossed party lines and voted governor Pat McCrory out of office in a red state (barely), I wold certainly hope they would repeal the very thing that caused it. I'm a North Carolinian myself going to a fairly liberal school that emphasizes trans rights. This whole thing is a huge joke that makes this very diverse and amazing state look foolish.

Kallixe said:

Considering North Carolina was the ONLY state that crossed party lines and voted governor Pat McCrory out of office in a red state (barely), I wold certainly hope they would repeal the very thing that caused it. I'm a North Carolinian myself going to a fairly liberal school that emphasizes trans rights. This whole thing is a huge joke that makes this very diverse and amazing state look foolish.

Click to expand...

We'll see. And, perhaps more to the point, if they do we'll see what they do afterward to get to the same (or worse) end results...

Here's hoping they behave, considering they're all up for reelection next year. I'm not holding my breath, though, given all their shenanigans in the last two weeks. That and I doubt turnout next year will be even a fraction of this year's.

Nothing. Charlotte repealed ALL of their original ordinances, even after it was clear the legislature was not going to follow through on the HB2 repeal. I am done with this fucking state.

edutton said:

Nothing. Charlotte repealed ALL of their original ordinances, even after it was clear the legislature was not going to follow through on the HB2 repeal. I am done with this fucking state.

Click to expand...

Very disappointing. Not surprising, but disappointing.

You'd think there was a realistic chance of repeal if McCrory called a special session. Wasn't even close.