First, let’s get something straight. I’m not writing this because I agree with discriminatory anti-LGBT laws. I don’t. But I am writing because something needs to change in the way we go about reacting to people who hold different views than us.

States passing anti-LGBT laws has been a fairly hot topic in the news lately, more recently with Mississippi and North Carolina. In Mississippi, state law has been passed which essentially focuses on denying services to those who identify as transgender. Columbia Law School combed through the law and found 10 situations that allow the denial of services. Some of these situations include a school mental health counselor refusing to see a transgender student, a government agency requiring female employees to wear skirts or dresses, and a religious university firing a single mother working in the cafeteria. Under the new law, these actions are completely legal.

North Carolina has passed its own version of anti-LGBT laws, but these go a different direction from those passed in Mississippi. A few months ago, the capitol city of Charlotte passed an LGBT protection law which protected members of the community from being denied services by businesses within the city. Less than a month later, the state called a special congressional session to pass a law making it illegal for local governments to pass anti-discrimination rules. The legislature passed this bill in 12 hours, which if you know anything about government is an impressive feat. Obviously, the state law supersedes the city law and Charlotte’s resolution was blocked.

Most recently, we’ve seen a wave of artists and performers cancel shows due to outrage over the laws. Bruce Springsteen, Ringo Star, and Jimmy Buffet have all cancelled scheduled performances in North Carolina. Filmmaker Michael Moore has even called off the distribution of his upcoming movie in North Carolina. And in theory, boycotting a state seems like a proper plan of action. You can deprive the state of revenue and potentially motivate the people to protest their government’s actions. But that’s not really what happens.

You’re not depriving the state of revenue. The state doesn’t put on concerts or movies, companies do. States governments aren’t deprived of entertainment, their people are. And yes, it may be true that some or most of the people who would be attending a concert or film showing support the law, but not all of them do. Citizens are being punished for passed laws that they vehemently oppose.

But the bigger issue here is this. Anti-LGBT laws stand to deny someone service because of who they are and what they stand for. So by cancelling a concert in North Carolina because of what the state believes in, are you not doing the exact same thing? By no means am I asking for the support of anti-LGBT laws. They’re wrong and shouldn’t be passed. All I’m asking for is some intellectual continuity. You can’t convince someone not to do something by doing the exact same thing.

If the US tried to convince another country that nuclear weapons were bad by nuking them, it would seem pretty counter intuitive. This situation isn’t any different. By denying North Carolina services for what they believe, we’re effectively telling them that it’s okay to do so. I don’t think that’s the message we’re trying to send, but it’s the one that’s being received.

At the end of day, we should work with these anti-LGBT states not against them. Work with the people. Start campaigns to educate the citizens on discrimination and why it’s wrong. After they get educated, people can vote new officials into office.

That’s the proper way to go about it. Depriving citizens of services because of a law passed by their state is just wrong, and we should stop doing it.