You realize this is circling back around, right? The issue is that the two are both defined by choices, because the second group is not gay men but men who have consensual sex with men, and the second group’s membership is voluntary regardless of whether or not the first’s is.
Eugine_Nier responded, in effect, that the most likely reason to see those restrictions as being in different classes is the “who—whom?” of religious hiring restrictions being ‘okay’ and sexual-behavior-based hiring restrictions being ‘not okay’ because of status alignments of religion and sexual behavior.
You realize this is circling back around, right? The issue is that the two are both defined by choices, because the second group is not gay men but men who have consensual sex with men, and the second group’s membership is voluntary regardless of whether or not the first’s is.
Eugine_Nier responded, in effect, that the most likely reason to see those restrictions as being in different classes is the “who—whom?” of religious hiring restrictions being ‘okay’ and sexual-behavior-based hiring restrictions being ‘not okay’ because of status alignments of religion and sexual behavior.
That’s a good point.