Even without words, the message is clear. I saw a cake similar to this at a "wedding" reception next to a real reception I was attending.
Posted on 02/23/2015 7:15:02 AM PST by SeekAndFind
A homosexual couple goes into a known Christian bakery and asks for a wedding cake for a same-sex “marriage,” is refused and then files a government complaint or sues. “Intolerance! Bigotry! Equal access!” is the cry. Many Americans have read of such stories in the news. Often the attempted purchase is a set-up, with activist-minded individuals targeting bakers whom they know will decline the request and then be vulnerable to state persecution by zealous bureaucrats.
It’s a new front in the war on faith, legitimate freedom and private property rights. Many point out that it constitutes an unprecedented trampling of religious liberty, and this is true. It also violates the principle of freedom of association, which isn’t explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but should be upheld. But neither of these arguments should be the centerpiece of the fight against the tyranny in question. There is another, far more powerful argument:
Freedom of speech.
Usually missed in the commentary on this subject is that the bakers in question are not refusing service to a type of people — they are refusing to be party to a type of message. This is not debatable. When you put writing on a same-sex “wedding” cake, you’re crafting a message; if you place figurines (of two men, for instance) on that cake, you’re erecting symbols relating that message. Note here that the Supreme Court has already ruled that “Symbolic Speech” — a legal term in U.S. law — is protected under the First Amendment; examples of such rulings would be that pertaining to flag-burning and the Tinker v. Des Moines case.
And can we compel people to participate in the creation of a message? Forced speech is not free speech.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“The law says I have to make you a cake. I don’t agree. But. I will comply with the law. On a separate note, I have to admire your bravery in purchasing, and possibly even eating, a cake made under political duress. Good luck with that.”
You posted:There’s also a practical approach one could use if a person wants to avoid all the hassle: offer only one, standard, one-size-fits-all wedding cake. Perhaps it might even include in icing a verse from scripture addressing marriage - it shouldn’t be hard to find one. And include on the bakery shop wall a sign that says “No custom cakes”.
If somebody wants the wedding cake without the Bible verse (no matter what their demographics) you point to the sign.
***
That is one solution, but it impinges on business. Most people don’t want a wedding cake like everyone else, they WANT a custom cake. Why should the bakery have to lose business? Now, for my own taste (no pun intended), as long as the cake did not display any homosexual message or included two brides or two grooms, I’d make the cake for a homosexual couple. I don’t endorse homosexual activity and I don’t believe in “gay” marriage either.
In the south a lot of discrimination was STATE MANDATED, now they want the the STATE to MANDATE the OTHER WAY AROUND this TIME.
Using STATE POWER to COERCE BEHAVIOR is WRONG even if it is for GOOD INTENTIONS, because the road to HELL is paved with them.
Even without words, the message is clear. I saw a cake similar to this at a "wedding" reception next to a real reception I was attending.
My approach, if I objected, would be custom pricing on custom cakes. Any pervert who demands a cake I don’t want to make can pay a price so insanely high that they would be forced to go elsewhere. “No problem - that will be $38,417.22 for the cake you want.”
And the contract would specify that there is no penalty other than refunding their money if the cake is not delivered on time and satisfactory (if they actually pay, they will at the last minute get a refund due to “unforeseen difficulties”). It would be nice if those who object could simply refuse, but we have lost our freedom of speech, freedom of association, and freedom of religion. The only option for those who object is misdirection.
No.
Minorities, ethnicities arevnot activities. Neither are they activities that are inherently wrong, borderline evil.
I have no problem serving whatever minorities. However, should a white man come in to request a cake/services for a KKK meeting, I would decline. Should a black man come in for services for a Black Panther meeting, I would decline.
See the difference?
The florist in question HAD served the plaintiff in this case, in the past, but could not/would not participate in the ACTIVITY of same sex marriage that violates her Christian beliefs.
Offer ONLY cakes for Ceremonies of Holy Matrimony. Specifically say that this bakery does NOT provide ANY products for Marriages of any kind.
How nice of you. How Christian to endorse, through active participation in the ceremony.
Christians are called to be ‘separate’ and peculiar people. Participating in that way, one is not so ‘separate’.
See my post #28
By baking the cake, you have actively endorsed it.
Simple solution. You have a catalog featuring all of your products. Homosexual weddings cakes, you only have two, the Sodom and Gomorrah cake, and the Revelations cake. Both cakes burst into flames when the candles are lit and melt all the tortured figurines.
I don’t think that Christ endorsed sin by associating with sinners.
Sinners who see the love of Christians are more likely to recognize the error of their ways and seek the fulfillment that a relationship with Christ can bring.
Neither did he pat the adultress on her head and tell her it was ok.
But he did keep the crowd from throwing rocks at her. Some would say that was going easy on the sinner. I think his mercy gave her something to think over, and make the right decision.
I didn’t have any writing or a bride/groom cake topper on my wedding cake. Flowers don’t usually have any symbols either. Gays could just eliminate such and still sue the business.
Sounds like a good plan for putting one’s self out of business. That sure would avoid all the hassles.
Folks don’t want a one size fits all wedding cake. That’s why you have custom bakers in the first place.
He ‘stopped’ the crowd from stoning her by exposing their own rotten selfrighteousness. Nothing else.
Stoning does not rise to the level of non-participation in their perversion.
Exposing rotten self righteousness. Truer words have never been typed.
You posted: By baking the cake, you have actively endorsed it.
***
I don’t agree. If I make a birthday cake as a baker, I am not “endorsing” the birthday. If I make a bar mitzvah cake, do I become Jewish?
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.