Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss
A hockey player is mandated to wear all kinds of equipment they may or may not like. Acting like wearing some shirt meant to signify inclusiveness is not some giant infringement on their freedoms anymore than wearing a helmet or a visor is.
|
You call it inclusiveness, while from another perspective it's focused on "sexual orientation" and goes against foundational belief systems of large number of people.
What if society of tomorrow believed "pedophilia" was "ok" in society? Would it be bigoted if a subset of people didn't agree with that or chose not to actively support that group of people?
The point is that these are areas of belief or moral standards that people carry, and this player is not forcing his belief on you. But to say it shouldn't matter, when you surely have your own moral standards that you wouldn't cross if you felt you were asked to support something that crossed a line.