... until they told me human sacrifices were involved ...
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.
Of course it is. Even if sexual orientation is immutable, marriage is a choice.
You cannot be forced to proclaim a message that you do not believe.
Yup, I’d say that’s right. It’s the enablers and helpers of those who believe America needs to be dragged down a notch that’s the root problem.
“stop hanging out with people who only bring up the Holocaust as a way to illustrate unrelated arguments”
Presumably, the author is thinking of a past president who compared the Holocaust as being equivalent to recognizing the Jewish state’s capitol? Yes, that must be it.
:p
But if you support the death penalty for someone who savagely rapes, murders and mutilates a person, that makes you EXACTLY THE SAME as the murderer, according to libthink.
My thoughts on this may not accurately reflect the law as written and interpreted but this seems so much simpler to me than people are making it out to be.
If you run an establishment open to the public, you cannot refuse to sell items that are available “as is” to anyone for any reason. Example, a baker fills the display case with bread and cakes and donuts for sale to the public - any person who walks in can buy it. This is basic contract law. The baker offered it for sale and the customer accepted the offer. Simple. That is a contract.
But no member of the public can compel an establishment to enter into a contract unwillingly, for any reason at all. The baker can refuse to make swastika cakes, he can refuse to make cakes with KKK on them, he can refuse to make a 15 layer cake for a straight Christian couple, and he can refuse to make a cake for a gay couple for any reason at all. No person can be compelled by the public into forced labor. Even if they offer this general service “we make custom cakes” it does not mean they have to make any damn cake any customer wants to have made.
You cannot force a Jewish caterer to serve Ham, nor force a Jewish or 7th Day Adventist to cater an event on Saturday, nor force a band to play songs they don’t like. At least, up until the stupid Obamacare ruling forcing people to buy insurance this was a pretty obvious legal understanding. Two people must both be willing to enter into a contract. Nobody can be forced. The reason - be it hate, love, religion, ignorance, lack of skill, lack of time, lack of supplies, lack of profit for the effort - doesn’t matter.
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.
Record is pretty clear he didn’t make gay wedding cakes for anyone. Nor would he make cakes for anything else that violated his beliefs (e.g., Halloween cakes), cakes with denigrating or negative messages.
Yes you are right. But I think it is even simpler than that. The reason doesn’t matter. Religious objection to me is besides the point. To me it is simple age old common law. Two people must willingly enter into a contract. The reason one party doesn’t wish to enter into a contract is irrelevant.
Putting a cake on the shelf of a public establishment is “an offer for sale” and the terms are usually posted such as hours of operation and which forms of payment they accept. The second someone walks in and says “I’ll buy it” the offer is accepted and the contract is done.
But open to the public does not mean you have to accommodate any special request any member of the public asks. There could be 15 reasons why the baker refuses to make a specific cake. It is silly to even argue the question that his refusal is based on hatred or religion or any other issue. He cannot be compelled, period.
Ok, explain this one away then:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/nyregion/union-square-hate-crime-killing.html
Then they're neither Jewish nor Christian.
Those words mean something.
... until they told me human sacrifices were involved ...
I wouldn't want to enter such a den of iniquity.
Just to be clear, I mean to say that the cake on the display case is offered for sale “as is” and per the posted policies. If the store had a sign that said “we will write anything you want on the cake for 20 cents per character” then the baker would have to write whatever the customer asked. But generally, the cake on display is offered for sale as-is and must be sold as-is to anyone who agrees to the posted terms. The baker cannot be compelled to do anything he does not want to do if he did not already offer to do it.
So is Islam. Majority of “Muslim countries” govern according to Islamic socialism. All part of the same plot by the god of this world.
“Jewish” is an ethnicity in addition to a belief system.
Sexual “orientation” is not immutable. Romans 1:26-27 describes it as a change (literally, “exchange”) from natural to unnatural.
Carter said that?
The baker in this case had sold cakes like that to the gay couple before. He had no problem with that.
The antisemites like to point that out when they discuss Marxism, since Marx, although he was atheist and his father Heinrich (born Herschel Levy) was a convert to Lutheranism, had a paternal grandfather (Marx Levy Mordechai) who was rabbi of Trier. So all “Bolshevism” they falsely characterize as Jewish, assigning guilt by association via their racist outlook.
i just know when my kid got married, the cake was at the venue when we got there. and the flowers were delivered (dropped off) so we never saw the vendors. The facilities personnel put everything together, for us.
Again, photographer? No, thank you. Not enough eye bleach.
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.