«

»

An interesting spin

As most folks are probably aware, the Christian Colorado baker who’s so far 2-0 in court (1 outright win, 1 settlement that was effectively a win) has been sued YET AGAIN by the same fucking plaintiff, who apparently can’t get enough of that sweet sweet court action — even though plaintiff effectively lost twice already.*

For a lot of people, it’s difficult to decide where to come down on this case.  Either it’s a religious freedom issue, or it’s a public accommodation issue.  Either you have the right of your religious convictions to not create art for people who go against your religious convictions, or simply by being in business serving the public, you are bound to create art for anyone who asks you to (and is willing to pay for it), regardless of how it might violate your religious convictions.

I just saw a comment on Facebook that might put the whole thing into perspective:

There’s a big difference between baking bread to FEED people, a common need, and making cult-items for cult-worship, which is extraordinarily specific. Each community has to provide those items for its own members.

In essence, nobody “needs” a wedding cake; and if they want a particular kind of wedding cake that is not the sort of thing someone outside of their community is likely to agree to make, they are expected to find someone in their own community who will, rather than trying to force someone not of their community to do so.

The two communities in question are the Christian community, and the gay community.

And we’re all aware that Masterpiece Cakeshop was targeted specifically to spark the legal battle that ensued.  The plaintiffs can’t lie about that; there were plenty of other cake shops, the owner offered to sell them a non-customized cake, and they weren’t having any of it.  This is weaponized lawfare, pure and simple.

But it violates the dictum that nobody should be forced to do something against their will simply because they happen to operate a business that makes the sort of thing that someone else wants to pervert for “reasons”.

I mean, let’s say I have an old Ford Model A and I want my mechanic to make a rat-rod out of it.  But my mechanic doesn’t believe in making rat-rods, and in fact feels very strongly that my Model A ought to be restored.  Can I sue him for refusing to do what I want to pay him to do?  Sure, if I want to be laughed out of court and find a new mechanic.**

No, I would be expected in that case to seek out a mechanic who specialized in, or at least did rat-rod conversions.  Thus fulfilling the commenter’s dictum that cult-items for cult-worship should be provided by the cult’s community.

Conversely, if plaintiff had approached Masterpiece Cakeshop and simply purchased a ready-made cake, the owner would not have been put in the position of having to provide a custom cult-item for plaintiff’s cult-activity.

This seems fair to me.  Every rule can be taken too far, and the folks who argue that this is a public accommodation case are simply wrong.  “The public” does not typically walk into a Christian-owned wedding cake shop and order a cake for a gay wedding.

And let’s pose another proposition:  What if plaintiff had walked into a Muslim-owned bakery and asked for such a cake?  (Yes, that proposition has been posed before.)  Does anyone in the “public accommodation” arena actually believe a discrimination suit would have been filed against the baker?  (Does anyone actually think plaintiff was deranged enough to ASK a Muslim-owned bakery for such a thing?)

What this was and continues to be about is the attempted destruction of the majority Christian society in this country and its adherents who still believe certain things are immoral and will not participate in the doing of them.

Those people have rights, too.  And those rights are being trampled on in the name of inclusiveness and diversity, both of which ought to be considered obscenities rather than virtues.  It needs to stop, and I have a feeling one of these days it’s going to stop — violently.

Citizens, be vigilant.

__________________

* See how I did that without pronouns?

** For the record, I don’t own a Model A, and I think rat-rods are ridiculous.