Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not only the same, it's worse. You have 2 choices: 1) Decline to recognize thst Google is in any way a special case, and so treat Google like any other private business, like your brother-in-laws little one-man coffee shop. 2) Recognize that Google is in any way special and different from some other random small private business. Let's say you subscribe to 1) : On the surface level, being denied service in the a…
> On the surface level, being denied service in the app store because your app caters to people who are poly, is like being denied service in the general store because you're black, or Chinese, Or Jewish. No it's not! Your race is innate, sexuality is innate, that isn't. Your argument is so transparently ridiculous that I highly doubt you're operating in good faith.
You want to rent a new appartment. You have your money and job and credit score and reputation as a good tennant all good to go. But the owner needs to know what color your toothbrush is, and apparently yours is the wrong color.
I wonder what whether you consider religion innate or a choice? I somehow just magically predict that you currently benefit from the fact that other people allow you something you don't allow other people.
Using your clearly not ridiculous and clearly good faith argument, I should be free to, say, run a motor vehicles office in your city, and deny you a drivers license because I consider any sincere belief in any religion to be evidense of mental incapacity, and for everyone's safety we can not have irrational people operating vehicles around other people. They might decide that God told them to run someone over, or they might not value life properly because they don't think dying is really dying.
I suspect you don't think I should be allowed to make that kind of call over other people.
Tell me more about ridiculous arguments. It's truly fascinating.