Posted on 12/08/2017 10:57:09 AM PST by nickcarraway
New Year’s resolutions: get outdoors more often, read more books, and stop hanging out with people who only bring up the Holocaust as a way to illustrate unrelated arguments and never to talk about the systematic murder of six million Jews.
This week the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune published an editorial, “Wedding Cakes And Conscience,” contending that a baker in Colorado being forced to design a wedding cake for a gay couple would constitute a violation of his freedom of expression. To illustrate the point, the Tribune encouraged readers to understand Colorado baker Jack Phillips’ predicament, saying, “imagine a Jewish baker being required to put a swastika on a cake.”
Read more: https://forward.com/schmooze/389592/no-forcing-jews-to-bake-swastika-cakes-is-not-like-forcing-homophobes-to-ba/
The newspaper rounded off the article about why the gay couple should stop “forcing a baker to swallow his objections” by pointing out that the cake situation is not the same as Black Americans being turned away from businesses during the Jim Crow area, since the issue there was just that a lot of the time Black people needed to use the bathroom, which is a “basic bodily function.” You know, that thing that happens after you eat a cake with a swastika on it.
Freedom of expression really is an amazing thing. In only one article, a newspaper managed to take anti-Semitism out of context to make a point about how gay people should be grateful and stop complaining, while saying that the Black civil rights movement was mostly propelled by the need to use the bathroom.
Is there a journalism award for insulting three minority groups at once? If so, nominate the Tribune.
How bout a muslim baker being forced to bake an israeli map with Jerusalem as the capital?
Refusing is discrimination against Jews.
Is swastika cake like German Chocolate?
Yummy!
Last I checked Nazis were not a protected class in any state.
Um, yeah, it is.
Exactly. Should an Orthodox Jewish baker who believes the Torah be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings if he does not want to do so?
It's a good analogy only if the Jewish deli sold ham sandwiches to other people but refused to sell to it to the plaintiff. If an establishment does not sell a item to anyone then it can't be discrimination if they refuse to sell it to you.
How about forcing bakers to make cakes for Satanic weddings?
How about forcing men to take gay boudoir photos?
The reason that its different is because the law now protects homosexuality as a protected status. So if you refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, you are discriminating against a person with protected status under the law. If you refuse to bake a cake for a Nazi, you aren’t discriminating against a person with protected status under the law. If, tomorrow, liberals are granted protected status, then conservatives wouldn’t be able to refuse to bake a cake for a liberal.
Yeah but that’s factual now!
Besides - you’d have to get the Muslim to even serve the Jew to begin with!
Levity aside - no business should be compelled to provide customized services to clients against anything they disagree with.
From cake bakers to even pharmacy companies being forced to provide execution drugs.
Whatever happened with the good old days of “no shirt, no shoes, no service”? They want to play most offended, then the business owner has the right to be offended and not give service.
Nazis forcing Jews to Bake Swastika Cakes Is Not Like Forcing Homophobes (my guess is she means people who, for the purpose of striving for heaven or to just lead a good life, follow the teaching of God who states ‘for a man to lay with another man is an abomination’) To Bake Gay Cakes (eh, again, guessing she means baking then decorating a cake depicting and celebrating the act of homosexuality as being a good thing, spreading that statement and advice for living to others, the party attendees)
Eh, It kinda is.
It is IDENTICAL
Oh BS. Protected status is a way of giving preferred status.
That’s why you have morons running around denying services to white men because - get this - they’re not “protected.
The while civil rights law should be repealed as the oxymoron it is.
Even assuming you agree with the law you can stupidly claim, as you do, that their protected status forces other people to kowtow to their whims. Yes - the baker can’t say “we don’t serve your kind here” and that’s good. But the gay couple don’t get to say “bake me a cake that you find offensive because I demand it and you have to”.
That’s what living in a free society is all about Charlie Brown.
and never touch the muzzies
Yes it is.
It’s also the same as forcing a black cake baker to bake a pro-KKK cake.
Why are leftists so stupid?
Remember, the issue is never the issue. The issue is the agenda.
According to Progressives, Black people cannot be racist. By the same agenda, homosexuals cannot be predjudiced or anti-Christian.
Double standards are not considered evil by Progressives. They are considered justified.
The reason that its different is because the law now protects homosexuality as a protected status.
The problem, of course, is that “protected status” violates equal protection under the law.
Sure they are. Every anti-discrimination law I'm aware of prohibits discrimination on the basis of race.
“and never touch the muzzies”
—
They know enough to avoid talking walks up to a rooftop with a Muslim.
“Yes, it is.
I’m a Jew. Does it give me a say in the matter, Forward Jenny?”
The lack of any logic on the part of Leftists is, at the same time, both frustrating and expected. Frustrating, because you expect more out of otherwise reasonably intelligent people. Expected, because Leftists in every place and at all points in time are ONLY interested in results, and they do not care what they have to do to obtain them - whether it is lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, or just violating the rules of logic in an infuriating way.
I have no use for people like this, except as a negative example for my kids.
Now, getting back to the logic game for a bit, what would “Forward Jenny” have to say about a Moslem cake baker being asked to bake a cake with a picture of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban on it (such an image presumably being offensive to Moslems, judging from past reactions to such images)? Somehow or other, I’m quite sure that she’d find some moronic reason why that baker wouldn’t have to bake that cake, but the reasoning is EXACTLY the same...and what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.