Though inaccurate seasonally, this Onion piece captures to me the difference in the way the political evangelical community perceives themselves in society, which I don't think is how most see them.
The burger joint is as far off as the race comparison. If a burger place refused to make rainbow colored french fries but still served gays their regular menu items then it is a million miles away from what African Americans faced when they couldnt even enter the building. Not even the same universe.
Now I agree here. The content is defensible. Not simply a plain cake. But seriously, its just a stunt to even show up there asking for that cake. The guy serves EVERYONE. Leave him alone.
edit: my original post was not appropriate. The question is where this falls in slippery slope of “separate but equal”.
My comments extend to the fact that the struggle for racial justice and equality are totally different than someone who was born with a penis and a gagillion Y chromosomes in their DNA, wanting people to treat them as a woman and for people to celebrate it at the same time.
Which gene houses the code that makes a man who was born with billions of Y chromosomes embedded in his cells think he's a woman?
Nazis and Klansmen aren't protected from discrimination. Your content protections would apply just as much as to a racist baker refusing to bake cakes for interracial weddings or even just Black people's weddings.
Bullshit. Maurice Bessinger made the same sort of argument this baker is making. You simply don't like the comparison because you acknowledge that racism is wrong but think this guy is justified.
I'd go the other direction, considering how ornate wedding cakes are and the fact that they agreed to bake the cake based on the design before they knew what it signified to the purchaser.
Yes the struggle for civil rights has a long history in the US and the kind of discrimination Black people went through was extreme. But how does that excuse discrimination against other groups? Is it ok to discriminate against a very masculine-looking lesbian woman who isn't Black? Is it less egregious because she isn't Black?
The person who did this is a fool who is more likely to hand the far-right Republicans on the Supreme "Court" a case that will do untold amounts of damage to anti-discrimination laws, particularly for the LGBTQ community, than accomplish anything productive here. So I remain on record that this is a stupid stunt.
The pastry chef has religious rights and freedoms too. This is basically the same case about the baker's religious freedom. No like-y the message, no do-y the cake. This whole case should be tossed out...
Just to play devil's advocate, aren't hotels and meals more a matter of necessity than cake? I think a more fair comparison involves baking a cake for black people. To not do so would obviously be a matter of racial discrimination. In this case involving gender issues, though, there may be a morality implication for some. I won't argue one way or another about the cake. The trans phenomenon, TBH, is very unclear for me.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would apply to this baker discriminating against people on the basis of race.
Would baking a cake for devil worshippers be just baking a red cake, or would baking a cake with the rebel flag be just a matter of a red/white/blue cake? Should a black baker be compelled to bake a cake for white supremacists?
