Gay Video Game Players Denied Service? It Could Happen If These Two Bills Pass

Video gaymers to be banned? We examine two impending bills and what they could mean for the gaming community.

There are two bills being discussed at this very moment which could impact us gamers in a big way. These two bills not only go against basic rights that every U.S. citizen has, but encourages discrimination. 

One of these bills is being drafted by a lobbyist in Washington D.C. The other bill needs only an approval signature from a state governor.

The first bill is what I will call the 'NFL Gay Ban'

It is proposed by lobbyist Jack Burkman who feels that somehow having gay athletes, like the recently outed college draftee Michael Sam, is the reason the NFL is going downhill. He says,

“If the NFL has no morals and no values, then Congress must find values for it”

The second bill, which is even more pressing, is Arizona's Senate Bill 1062

This bill, which has already passed through the Arizona legislature, will allow any business to deny service to gay men and women. The only thing the business needs to do, if action is brought up against it, is say that it is for “religious beliefs.” This bill is only one signature away from approval and it will be up to Gov. Jan Brewer to make the call.

So how does this affect gamers?

Both of these bills allow, no, encourage the discrimination of anyone who labels themselves as gay. If the NFL bill goes through, then it will set a dangerous precedent for other sports to do the same. We could see far-reaching consequences with athletes excluded from game releases like Madden NFL just for being gay.

However, it is the Arizona bill which could cause serious civil rights issues. If the bill passes, gamers in Arizona could see a denial of service at video game stores if they are gay. Then, if more governors follow the lead of Gov. Brewer, we could see other states adopting the same policy. Can you imagine not being able to buy Titanfall just because you are gay? And what about others who are part of the LGBT + group that don’t identify as gay, but have the connotation connected to them?

Let us hope that these two bills fail. If not, we could see a step back in the wrong direction.

Featured Columnist

Gaming enthusiast. Great at many, master of none.

Published Jul. 26th 2021
  • Samuel Franklin
    Featured Contributor
    I really have no words for this.
  • Blue_7453
    It seems as if no one, especially in the media, have actually read these bills. Go read the Arizona bill - it's only 2 pages long. It doesn't even mention gay people or homosexuality in it, despite being dubbed the "anti-gay bill." What a fuss over nothing.
  • Mongol_7607
    Personally you could take all the gay guys and put them on a boat and sink it. They are nothin but a genetic sesspool and a waste to our society. There is a reason we arent a sexual. Silly fagots dicks are for chicks. Quit crying about your rights and do us all a favor and kill yourselves.
  • Venisia Gonzalez
    Featured Columnist
  • Brian S
    Featured Correspondent
    This seems to be a bit of a stretch more than anything else. Yeah, businesses refusing service for things as arbitrary as orientation is a jerk move, but I don't really see the whole slippery slope argument of "if they don't let you play football, soon they'll come for your games." Even if places like Gamestop refused gay customers, which I doubt they would, even if they could tell, what's to stop people from ordering online? Also, the Titanfall comparison is kinda weird, since hiding your online identity is easy to do in games, if you're careful.
  • Fathoms_4209
    Featured Columnist
    I agree. I'm not sure I'm seeing the downward slope correlation here.
  • Fathoms_4209
    Featured Columnist
    As I understand it, any business has the right to refuse service to anyone, and they don't even have to provide a reason.

    If that's the case, I don't even get the point of the bill. Unless it's saying that too many businesses are facing lawsuits at the hands of gay individuals, who claim they were denied service because of their sexual orientation. And trust me, right now, there are QUITE a few such lawsuits, especially on the employee side (i.e., prospective job hunters suing a company because they think they weren't hired because they were gay).

    Either way, the bill doesn't sound like a civil rights issue to me. Sounds like it's just reinforcing any business's right to refuse service to anyone.
  • Katy Hollingsworth
    Former Staff Editor
    I think it's more about making a religious point than a business one. I think problems arise when someone refuses to work with a gay person, or when a company like Hobby Lobby or Chick Fil A refuses to hire a gay person based on religious beliefs (often coined as discrimination).

    To be honest... These companies have the right to do that, especially since they're very widely known as Christian companies. We can't fight for equal rights for only one subset of people and ignore the rights of everyone else.

    Kids have a right to not play with each other on the playground.
  • [[Deleted]]
    Sometimes I'm glad I'm Canadian where anyone can marry anyone, as long as you both watch hockey.

    Jokes aside, this just seems like grand homophobia. Many sports have had gay athletes for over a decade now, what makes this case so special? As long as everyone behaves appropriately in the locker room and on the field then what does it matter, I mean it would be a different story if gay athletes were making sexual remarks, or doing inappropriate touching, stuff like that, but I don't have a memory of anything like that hitting major news headlines (not saying that it hasn't I'm not the most avid newsreader after all).

    I just don't see how you can deny someone service just because their gay, I know some gay people, their really nice people and if you ever feel uncomfortable with a subject, or just about anything and you say something they'll do their best to accommodate. Theirs been times they've hopped out of a line up and used a different cashier because the one they went to was obviously uncomfortable serving them.

    This isn't always the case but at least with the gays, both guys and girls its more or less been that way, they know some people are uncomfortable with their lifestyle, but that doesn't mean we can't all get along.

    As for the religious viewpoint, Maybe I'm more understanding of the gay community because I have a completely non standard "religion" ... its not so much a religion as just a set of spiritual beliefs. But I've had to find a middle ground with the part of my family that's Jehovah witness, and co-workers that are very christian, and yes I've found that some people take their religion very seriously and can be outright inflexible borderline on discriminatory but even so I think this is going too far.

    If you'll respect me I'll respect you.
  • Corey Kirk
    Featured Columnist
    Exactly, I'm not gay and label myself as a Christian, but that is no excuse to accept these kinds of bills. Denying someone service based on discrimination is just plain wrong.
  • Coatedpolecat
    Featured Correspondent
    I think either Kansas or Kentucky just passed the "gay ban" as well.

    I won't even begin to describe how much these bill upset me, but hopefully it doesn't gain anymore traction.
  • Amanda Wallace
    Former Staff Editor
    As a Kentuckian, not us! That was Kansas.

Cached - article_comments_article_12670