Patrick Stewart Defends Gay Cake Refusers
Reason magazine has a short story and video of one of my favorites, Patrick Stewart (Capt. Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation), standing up for some Irish bakery owners who got in trouble for refusing to put words in support of gay marriage on a cake. The video is just over a minute long.
He's certainly not as strong on the issue as I would have liked. I say the bakery owners should be able to refuse service to whomever they want. He seems to think discriminating because of someone's sexuality is wrong, but it's ok to refuse to write words the bakers find objectionable. it's nice to see one of my heroes believes in at least some individual choice.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 10:14 AM
11 comments
11 Comments:
If bigoted business owners choose to put themselves out of business by refusing to serve the 10% of the population who is gay, i'm inclined to let them do so. There's plenty of competiton out there.
People who are afraid and obsessed with gay people worry me. Look how many posts Fred has posted about this issue. As if this were a real issue that has any impact on the everyday citizen.
You look like a pervert when you constantly obsess on gay people in the name of "individual choice".
"If bigoted business owners choose to put themselves out of business by refusing to serve the 10% of the population who is gay, i'm inclined to let them do so."
And they didn't decline to do business with them, from what I understand. They simply declined to put lettering on a cake they found offensive. Very similar to a case that happened in the U.S., I believe.
10% gay??? I guess they didn't include LDS, or priests, or republicans... or cell phone sales reps from Rhode Island. What a country. Hope no one invades us while were while were watching bruce gender reality TV and trying to figuring out what sex we are. Must be something in the water.
I've seen cake decorators refusing long names on birthday cakes before. Sometimes it's hard to fit a name on the cake, let alone a phrase.
I am sure you recall the two cases in Colorado, where bakers were sued. The first case, the customer wanted some anti-gay bible verses on their cake..the baker refused. The courts sided with the baker, stating that the baker had always refused to use vulgar language or images on any product purchased in this business..thus he was not discriminating, he applied the rule to all customers. BUT...the other case which involved the baker who refused a same sex wedding cake.....lost his case in court....why? Well the baker insisted it violated his religious believes.....but the court siding with the customer, stated his refusal was just a pretext to discriminate against Gays. Human Kind, is not really that kind....I am sure you are aware of that...and at times laws and regulations must be implemented to protect ALL Americans from discrimination, including private business.
Yep. You know if someone wanted anti- gay stuff on a cake and the baker refused, the courts would back them up.
Fred, you missed my entire point. The anti-gay bible quotes were considered vulgar.....and the policy of this business had always treated any person with the same rule: No vulgar language and no vulgar image, therefor there was no individual discrimination practiced...BUT...there was in the case of the business refusing a person because of their sexual orientation...gee dude.....relax your libertarian stoic soul..and think.....discrimination is simply wrong.
Any individual, whether in business or not, decides for himself what he's willing to do or put up with.
If someone wanted a cake baked with "Gay people are immoral" on it, and the gay baker refused to do it, that baker would probably get backed up by our politically correct courts. That there's a double standard here is really beside the point.
Everyone should be able to decide for themselves how they do business and who they're willing to do it with.
Fred, you are starting to sound a bit "homophobic", I have a major problem with that. So you actually believe that any person owning a business can treat the public in any rude, horrific, threatening and discriminating manner they wish? The next time you come to care for my lawn, I have a few words to share with you.
"... can treat the public in any rude, horrific, threatening and discriminating manner they wish?"
Yes, they actually can, now that you mention it. But that's not what happened here since nobody in these instances was rude, horrific, or threatening. Discriminating, perhaps?
But everyone discriminates throughout their daily life. They discriminate in what they buy, where they shop and who they hang with. That's a human right. All these people in question did was refuse to do part of a job that, as Patrick Stewart pointed out, they found very offensive. Anyone should have the right to refuse such things, so long as they're in a position to do so. In other words, it may not apply to an employee.
Post a Comment
<< Home