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.

​

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The genius of the free market is that someone will always fill a need.

Intolerance is amazingly resistant to free market pressures in the short and medium term- the span of human lifetimes.

As I pointed out before, even the father of free-market economics, Adam Smith, recognized that the free market is not a panacea. He regarded benevolence as admirable, as a great virtue, and he saw the instinct for sympathy towards one's fellow man as the foundation on which civilised conduct is built. Because of this, besides Wealth of Nations, he wrote another book: The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

The failures of Smith's invisible Hand are where laws that protect minorities come into play. Are you familiar with "sundown towns"? Those are entire municipalities in the USA where, even today, minorities within city limits after sundown are still met with violence. Hence the name.

Are they rare? Sure. Is what they do illegal? Without question.

But the fact is, if you are in one for whatever reason, if you are a minority, there is nobody within a reasonable distance who will fill your needs voluntarily. Heaven help you if your car breaks down in one. Which is the reason The Negro Motorist's Green Book existed- so you could plan your travel route to avoid them.

Did you know that there are states in which Atheists still cannot hold public office? The free market will not address that issue on an infrastate basis anytime soon. Should atheists wait another 150 years?

How has the free market helped the LGBT community in those states in which they may be fired or evicted for being gay. Do they have jobs and housing? Yes. Do they have the security in their jobs and housing that straights enjoy, that tomorrow they could lose either or both, merely because of a change in management? Absolutely not.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Or as was said by people who got to look down the barrels of intolerance in previous generations:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

~ Martin Niemöller

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
~Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

[BrockBallingdark]

Sorry, Brock, but Illinois is one of 19 other states that have already passed similar religious freedom legislation.

That's odd, never recalled any business in IL acting in this manner. If true, fine... move it to a State that is not like Indiana or IL.

 

[jrowland]

I'll just link this article from Reason (a libertarian site, if you didn't know).

And this, which talks more generally about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

All-in-all, I think the debate, like all political debate, is dominated by demagogues who eschew any and all compromise. I think the "system" is doing a reasonable job of finding the balance between the competing interests of sex-orientation discrimination and religious freedom. Yes it's messy, its applied differently in different places, and it takes a long time. Welcome to the Republic.

 

[kenmarable]

Props to Gen Con for this. We had been considering taking our kids to their first Gen Con and this gives even more reason to. Given Gen Con's audience, this really makes sense. Between the 1960's civil rights movement and, as Zaruthustran pointed out, the ADA, I thought this was long settled and old news. But i'm looking forward to the day when this is just boring history for my kids or their kids.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I think my reasons for wanting to see GenCon move isn't so much all this political stuff but that where they are at now is at a breaking point to the point of it not sustainable anymore in Indianapolis. For about a decade between 2000 and 2010 the average of attendees was about 25,000 to 30,000 every year, then with the board game explosion here in the US that number has increased from 30,000 people to 60,000 in under 5 years. That's double, and the amount of room aimed at attendees via hotels and stuff like that hasn't been able to keep up with this rather sudden increase in convention goers.

When GenCon made their deal with the city to hold their convention in this city, they did not expect this increase in goers to happen. So for this reason alone it's more viable for GC to move to a different city, one with a bigger infrastructure and larger space to expand with the growing attendance that will be happening for the next few years and it will continue to grow as board games (and gaming as a whole) becomes mainstream within our society and is no longer a niche thing.

 

[Slamm-O]

If i read it right, the legislation will allow people to refuse service due to religeous reasons. Cant wait for the uproar when an antithiest says "You're religious? Sorry we don't serve your kind here."

 

[mlund]

Actually, the law specifically states that the government (ie - the monopoly of violence) may not compel a business to deliver service to individuals in a nature contrary to their religious beliefs unless it proves it to be "is the least restrictive means of furthering the compelling governmental interest."

Basically it keeps people from trolling religious businesses trying to sue them and fine them out of existence for not participating materially in same-sex, polygamous, or post-divorce weddings (state or private) if that's against their belief. Likewise a Jehovah's Witness who won't make cakes for a religious holidays, state holidays, or birthdays can't be held liable. Kosher and Halal delis aren't going to serve you pork either.

I think in a similar vein an atheist photograph who "doesn't do church weddings" likewise can't be compelled by force to choose between his beliefs and his livelihood.

At the same time, if provides for remedy so that someone is not forced to go on to the next town / county / state / whatever to get access to a service. You can have your wedding cake. You just can't use the state to shut down Shawna Taylor's bakery out of business because "she's a bigot!" and won't cater a same-sex wedding because she's Muslim when Joey Baldazzio's bakery across the street will do it without batting an eye-lash.

Marty Lund

 

[redrick]

Should a business be required to serve a man wearing a shirt that says, "People like you are why God created AIDS"?

Should a business be required to serve a man wearing a shirt that says, "Mexicans are like pool cues - hit them hard for good English."?

Should a business be required to serve a man wearing a policeman's uniform?

Should a business be required to serve a man wearing a dress?

In all of those cases, it involves clothing that identifies the would-be customer as someone that a significant number of people do not want to even be around. Even having them in your business can be an issue. Yet, I'm sure that you believe that only one of them should have the right to force the business owner to be in a transaction with them.

Fortunately, bigots are not a protected class.

The United States isn't Europe -- we don't throw people in jail for hate speech -- but we can throw folks out of our bars for verbally or physically assaulting other patrons.

And there is no equivalency between a man in a "God created AIDS" T-shirt and a woman, in a dress, who might have been born a man.

GenCon didn't bring this issue to Indiana. The state of Indiana raised this issue when it considered legally siding with the rights of the discriminator over the rights of the discriminated.

 

[madrivi]

For the same reason businesses are no longer allowed to discriminate on the basis of skin color. No class of people should be made to feel less than human.

I hope Gen Con moves to a more progressive city, I really do.

I'm only going to say it once: You nailed it.

When i read about using the right to do bussines to cover things like discrimination based upon your Gender it seems unbelievable, maybe time machines really exist and we are going back to the past...

Go GenCon go!