Gen Con Takes Stand For Inclusiveness

This rather breaks all my rules, in that I'm reporting on politics, and regional politics at that. That said, Gen Con, the hobby's largest American convention, intersects with this particular example, so it's hard to ignore; and this is an RPG news blog, after all. Plus, I agree with the sentiment, even if I'm doubtful about its actual effectiveness given the current contract. Gen Con has written to the local politician in its home city of Indianapolis, USA, threatening (kind of - they're contracted to stay there for five more years whether they like it or not) to consider moving elsewhere if a local law relating to businesses being able to refuse custom to same-sex couples is passed.

With multiple recent articles in just the last week (Monte Cook Games & Thunderplains, Green Ronin's Blue Rose), the subject of inclusiveness is not one that anybody can afford to ignore. However, the vitriolic comments these topics give rise to make discussion on them difficult at best.

Here's the letter they wrote.

​

 

[mrm1138]

A few things:

1) Good for Gen Con for taking this stand!

2) Good for EN World for reporting on it!

3) Shout outs to [MENTION=6755061]Kiraya_TiDrekan[/MENTION] and [MENTION=1457]Zaruthustran[/MENTION] as thread MVPs! You two are awesome!

 

[graypariah]

This isn't about bakeries or birthday parties though. First, parents aren't running a business, so they can invite or not invite whoever they like.

I don't care about a bakery - I care about getting medication at a pharmacy, getting proper treatment at an emergency room, getting a place to stay for the night in the only motel in town.

I can't be happy when I'm being treated as a non-person. Treat people fairly? Yeah, that would be nice wouldn't it? I sure would like it if businesses in Indiana treated me fairly.

It was simply a metaphor. Since we are dispelling with the metaphors though, do you honestly believe that you would not be treated at an emergency room or would be refused medicine at a pharmacy? How many times do you really visit a town with only one motel?

I apologize if any of this seems like personal attacks.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In other words, go back in the closet so I don't make anyone but myself uncomfortable? That is exactly what you are saying.

Simply put...

No.

No you are free to act as you like... But if people don't like it they are free to act how they like...no one really cares who any of us are on the inside.. Just pay for your room/burger/caugh medicine... But don't you dare make a scene about being different then complain you were treated different.

No one cares if I have a girlfriend a boyfriend or both...as long as I don't throw it up for the whole world to see and judge...

 

[Fergurg]

Guys, I may close this thread soon. With a couple of exceptions, it was remarkably civil - more so than many discussions about games! - and I'm really glad of that. However, I'm starting to sense some animosity creeping in at the edges now, and the law's passed and done. I'm heading out to my Pathfinder game, and I'll check in and see where things are when I get back.

Honestly, that'd probably be the best decision. Seems that at this point, everything has been said. Now, the conversation has boiled down to"I'm right!" "No, I'm right!"

Nobody is going to persuade anyone else at this point, so we should just move on.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

A few things:

1) Good for Gen Con for taking this stand!

2) Good for EN World for reporting on it!

3) Shout outs to @Kiraya_TiDrekan and @Zaruthustran as thread MVPs! You two are awesome!

Thanks, though I would put [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] on that list before me. I've gotten a little heated at times. He's the one with the legal expertise.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Wow. I don't think any thread on EN World has ever made me want to block so many users. And that's saying something.

There's a reason that politics should stay at CV and off ENW. Morrus, I think everyone is going around in circles. Better to close the thread after a fairly civil discussion than keep it open and have more bad blood between posters.

 

[Fergurg]

Can someone translate this for me? I'm flummoxed as to what this means.

The Ram is a steakhouse.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

It was simply a metaphor. Since we are dispelling with the metaphors though, do you honestly believe that you would not be treated at an emergency room or would be refused medicine at a pharmacy? How many times do you really visit a town with only one motel?

I apologize if any of this seems like personal attacks.

There are documented cases of transgender people being mistreated in hospitals.

There are documented cases of people being refused medication due to the religious beliefs of the pharmacist (birth control, specifically, but it sets a precedent).

If I'm driving through Indiana to get to Gen Con and end up in a small town at midnight...there are plenty of one-motel towns in every state.

 

[graypariah]

Honestly, that'd probably be the best decision. Seems that at this point, everything has been said. Now, the conversation has boiled down to"I'm right!" "No, I'm right!"

Nobody is going to persuade anyone else at this point, so we should just move on.

It has become less thought promoting than it was earlier. I will try to duck out myself.

Before I go I would like to leave people with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments

How much of what we believe is because it is the popular opinion among those we spend most of our time with (fellow internet gamers in my case) and how much of it is actually based on merit? Perhaps we should all sit down, meditate, and think over some of these deep philosophical questions and ask if we really are on the right side or if there even is a right side?

 

[Umbran]

I would love it if one of these cases went to court, and the judge said, "Just so you know, it is against my religion to allow discrimination against people on religious grounds."

Folks seem to have disregarded something mentioned earlier. In a diverse nation, religious freedom *cannot* be absolute. We cannot allow, "My religion says you must die," for example. Just as a practical matter, we *must* restrict some religious practice when that practice involves non-practitioners.

The only question is where we draw the lines.

Thus, arguments of the form, "But, that's a restriction of religious freedom!" have missed the point. We already *must* accept some restriction of religious freedom. We all know this. Any argument for allowing discrimination on religous grounds must be more detailed - why must *this particular* freedom be allowed? Why is it so special?