This mornig I received an email and an link from allout.org, a petition site. Lots of times there are causes I agree with and am happy to sign, but this one left me a bit in dubio.

Quote:Thanks to PayPal, its easier than ever to send and receive money across currencies and continents - but it is also PayPal's responsibility to make sure this technology doesn't fall in the wrong hands.

Who determines what are the "right" and "wrong" hands? I doubt a mob ruling like a petition is a good way to determine.

Quote: Anti-LGBT extremists all over the world are currently using PayPal to fundraise for their dangerous cause.

I am sure there are. But I am also pretty sure there are several organizations that might be perceived as such even though they are not (many people see atheist groups as hate groups for example).

Quote:Not only is it against PayPal's rules to promote promote "hate, violence, [and] racial intolerance," hate groups also damage PayPal's brand and credibility. We ask that PayPal join the fight against online hate and immediately shut down the accounts of anti-LGBT extremist groups using the service.

This is the part I have a problem with. Since none of the organizations are named, am I to assume that they are indeed hate promoting organizations? Should a financial service yield to public opinion who they should or should not conduct business with?

The link to the petition:
http://www.allout.org/en/actions/paypal

Thanks Leo, I couldn't quite work out why I felt uneasy about this petition, but you've spelled it out nicely. It'll need to be more specific before I'll even consider signing it, and even then I might not do so.

The problem with 'hate groups' is a proper definition and where does one draw the line? Could not atheists be considered a 'hate group'?

(September 12, 2011 at 4:50 am)leo-rcc Wrote: Since none of the organizations are named, am I to assume that they are indeed hate promoting organizations?

If you click on the link you provided, under the text explaining the petition you can click to read more, and then the list of the organizations pops up. They do seem pretty radical.

(September 12, 2011 at 7:45 am)IATIA Wrote: The problem with 'hate groups' is a proper definition and where does one draw the line? Could not atheists be considered a 'hate group'?

That is true,

For example; I would classify Young Earth Creationist organisations as hate groups. Because as Alonzo Fyfe argues quite well they make hate speech against atheists, when trying to link the holocaust with evolution by natural selection.

http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2009...te-on.html

However a lot of other people dont share my view of YEC organisations being hate-groups.

(September 12, 2011 at 8:11 am)Justtristo Wrote: However a lot of other people dont share my view of YEC organisations being hate-groups.

Hate requires thought, meaning the YEC's cannot qualify as a hate group.

Quote:Should a financial service yield to public opinion who they should or should not conduct business with?

Ideally, of course not. If they they break the law,it's up to law enforcement to prosecute them. I imagine that in the US, the Department of Homeland Security, with it's 250 THOUSAND employees, would be on that kind of thing like a dog turd on a shoe.

However,ignoring such demands can cost MONEY so small business needs to comply. Theoretically, big companies such as say Microsoft can tell such arsewipes to go fuck themselves. You know, like our governments do to us; by pretending to do the opposite.

If the customers take their business elsewhere, Paypal will comply with public demands. In all other cases, it's up to the whims of Paypal to decide how it composes itself. I don't see a problem with people boycotting things.