Probably the biggest eSports tournament was the 2014 LoL World Championship. It hosted 45,000 people in the stadium, and streamed to over 27 million people.

eSports have been growing steadily, even if WoT tournaments are just now catching up.

This just isn't true. Art has such a large degree of expression to it, and it's value is truly in the eye of the beholder. It is difficult to judge someone else's work because of this, because to that person their work may be invaluable, but you think it's crap.

If I program a system and my code is littered with globals, alternating snake case and camel caps, and I never release my system resources, guess what? I'm doing it wrong. Objectively wrong.

As someone who went to a liberal arts school, majored in CS, but took a lot of art classes, here is my observation: CS is far more difficult, but art is far more time-consuming.

I don't think I've ever seen this opinion expressed using proper capitalization.

Exactly.

People bring up the Jim Crow south all the time when talking about this. It's interesting to note that Jim Crow was not private enterprise being discriminatory, it was government discrimination. The reality is as long as you ensure individuals are free, discrimination by businesses is minimal, and dies out over time. There is no evidence that suggests government policies in any way improve or expedite this. In fast, the opposite has been true historically, as you pointed out with the Jim Crow laws.

Wait... that dude standing by the door at Best Buy is supposed to check receipts? Huh. Every time I've been there he just wishes me a good day.

Actually, I don't care if you discriminate b/c of your religion or any other reason. I don't think religion should be a part of this conversation.

That's part of the reason I never mentioned it- although you seem to be pretty pissed at religion in general.

That being said, I fall into the camp

with the stipulations I already stated.

So you just ranted about religion having more rights for a while, but that's not what I was talking about.

Sooo.... yeah.

The freedom to be a dick is exactly what liberty is all about.

Do you think freedom of speech means you're allowed to write a letter to your grandmother? No, it means you can say controversial and offensive things without fear of government retribution.

Freedom isn't a word that's supposed to make everyone happy all the time. Liberty is about having the right to be "openly racist, sexist, misogynist, transphobic, and homophobic", without fear of physical aggression.

That's not to say there aren't consequences for one's actions, but a free society isn't one that mandates everyone conform to specific belief system, it's one that allows people to believe what they want and behave as they like, as long as they don't physically hard other people.

So, as a business, you are being forced to associate with people.

I personally wouldn't use a service or purchase a good from a business that actively discriminates. But I don't think anyone has the right to dictate who they can or cannot refuse service to.

At the end of the day, discrimination is bad for business. All you need to defeat it is someone who is greedy to open a competing shop, and discriminatory business will wither and die- unless, of course, you are living in a region where everyone discriminates, in which case you having deeper problems than simply legislating a belief system.

I think people with certain belief should be allowed to discriminate, and this includes denying me service. I wouldn't like it, but I don't think I have the right to violently force them to perform a service for me.

The only exception to this would be people involved in public service (including utilities), or people who deal with the immediate health and well-being of others (hospitals). If there exist exigent life-or-death circumstances, a business cannot deny service.

I think your stance is one primarily of laziness. You don't want to exert the effort to convince people of something, you would prefer just to force a specific belief system upon people through the govt.

....so I can't say for sure what's in it. However, as long as any business is not actively causing physical harm by refusing a good or service, they should have the right to do so. If this is a bill to codify that right, I'm ok with that.

The government derives it's power from the ability murder people, imprison them, or impose violence on them. As soon as discrimination cases can be brought against a business for refusing to transact with some group or individual, the government force an outcome under threat of violence. No business should be forced to perform a service for anyone (excluding exigent, life-threatening circumstances). Our laws need to reflect that.

I just wish religion wasn't the backbone for this law.

Literally the best way to pass this test about gender imbalance is to segregate genders based on project. .... ....
I don't even....

....Google's search mechanism doesn't violate any of those, unless you are *really* stretching....

Spoken like someone who isn't just completely tired of using their voice but not being heard.