Wednesday, December 6, 2017

Pink Elephant Cakes ShareEmbed




I don't believe that this case has to concern itself with homosexuality vs. freedom of religion. The more basic principle is - can you be legally forced to create a design, a work of art, that you do not want to create?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/05/us/politics/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-cake.html
Posted by at

7 comments:

  1. Steve Parker, M.D.December 6, 2017 at 3:11 PM

    There was a time years ago in the U.S. you would hear folks say, "It's a free country."

    Not anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 2008December 6, 2017 at 4:39 PM

    Your argument is a sophism because it starts from a false premise. The baker did not tell the gays that the design is not available. If this was the case then you would be right. His actual wording was that he's not making the cake because he's against gay marriage. To make an analogy: if a drunken homosexual couple comes in a store, the store owner could tell them "we don't serve drunken people" or "we don't serve homosexuals". The former is legal, the latter is not.
    Anyway, the whole "civil rights" thing is illogical because you can not say that it is illegal to discriminate by race or sex and then you allow discrimination against men and white people. "Civil rights" should be renamed "the rights of women, homosexuals and coloured people"

    ReplyDelete
  3. FormerlibDecember 6, 2017 at 8:13 PM

    I used to work in the museum industry. A creationist museum said they liked the quality of my work and asked me to sculpt dinosaurs for their exhibits. I certainly could have used the income but I declined on principle because I don't agree with their philosophy. Should they be allowed to sue me?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jeremiah WrongDecember 6, 2017 at 11:57 PM

    In a free country, confectioners should not be forced to pack anyone's fudge

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousDecember 7, 2017 at 12:32 PM

    It amnt a free country no mo' my nigger.

    ReplyDelete
  6. UnknownDecember 7, 2017 at 3:49 PM

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    The constitution was a prohibition of Federal Powers, it was never intended to govern the interactions of private citizens nor the actions of individual states.

    A baker of cakes isn't an arm of the United States Congress!

    ReplyDelete
  7. UnknownDecember 7, 2017 at 3:59 PM

    Thanks to Lincoln we have a schizophrenic constitution. We're all sitting around talking about cakes.....

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)