A ?

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Wednesday, July 15. 2015

If an African American baker refuses to bake a birthday cake or a wedding cake with a Confederate Flag on top, should the African American baker be fined, boycotted, or otherwise punished?

Posted by Gwynnie in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 15:13 | Comments (21) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Nope; he's a protected class.

#1 Sam L. on 2015-07-15 15:57 (Reply)

Would merely asking an African-American baker to make a cake with a Confederate flag constitute a hate crime?

#2 feeblemind on 2015-07-15 16:06 (Reply)

I have a headache.

#3 Amazed on 2015-07-15 16:09 (Reply)

Ban cakes period. Problem solved.

#4 fjord on 2015-07-15 16:13 (Reply)

What if he's a Muslim and you ask him to make devil's food? Get out the knives.

#5 Colorado on 2015-07-15 16:28 (Reply)

Is it for a gay wedding? Is the black baker also Christian?

#6 B Moe on 2015-07-15 17:29 (Reply)

As long as it's gluten free, I don't care about the other details..................................

#7 I.......... on 2015-07-15 17:40 (Reply)

Political affiliation is not a protected class in most jurisdictions, though if it used as a proxy against a protected class, then it could represent a violation.

#8 Zachriel on 2015-07-15 18:39 (Reply)

I dispute that. Democrats have paid no price for their racist past (and I would contend - present). For example, the recent fracas over the Confederate flag in South Carolina was portrayed in political circles as a problem for Republicans when a Democrat put it up in the first place to protest civil rights legislation.

Also, I would say, the IRS seemed to pretty successfully target a political affiliation while one of the key players is living off her generous pension.

#8.1 mudbug on 2015-07-15 19:10 (Reply)

mudbug: Democrats have paid no price for their racist past (and I would contend - present).

Not sure what that has to do with the point raised. In any case, the Democrats paid a price because it sundered their party. The civil rights movement resulted in a generational shift, with blacks moving to the Democratic Party, and southern whites moving to the Republican Party.

mudbug: the recent fracas over the Confederate flag in South Carolina was portrayed in political circles as a problem for Republicans when a Democrat put it up in the first place to protest civil rights legislation.

That's because it was primarily Republicans who objected to removing the flag.

#8.1.1 Zachriel on 2015-07-15 20:02 (Reply)

You can't force someone to do something against their will, unless of course they are Christian or conservative or even worse a Christian conservative male. To even ask a non-Christian, a liberal or a woman to make a cake they don't want to make is a hate crime. But if you are a Christian conservative male and a liberal/non-Christian/woman demands you do something it is a hate crime to refuse.

I think I understand it now...

#9 GoneWithTheWind on 2015-07-15 19:11 (Reply)

Thanks...I now understand...being a Christian conservative male (and married with children) is by definition a hate crime.

#9.1 Mark on 2015-07-15 19:31 (Reply)

I'm in the same boat. Of course, it wasn't always so. Sixty years ago we "right-wing fundamentalists" would be your typical mainstream Protestant or Catholic.

#9.1.1 Jim on 2015-07-16 16:31 (Reply)

Oh, what's the point of a rhetorical question?

#10 charles on 2015-07-15 22:36 (Reply)

fined, boycotted, or otherwise punished?

Nope, rhetorically speaking.

Factually speaking, any citizen that opposes the Party Line will be punished one way or another.

“I am tired of fooling around,” he said. “As for the rights of anyone, tell your people they can go f*** themselves.”

The Colonel by Carolyn Forche

.

#11 chasmatic (Link) on 2015-07-16 09:12 (Reply)

He could bake it, but would you be stupid enough to eat it?
I wouldn't eat anything that I had "forced" another people to make, Coercion is a bitter spice.

#12 John the River (Link) on 2015-07-16 09:13 (Reply)

Conflicts like the bakery incident to which this rhetorical question alludes are never about the thing, the primary cause of the conflict. The conflicts are about power and control.
Cake? Really, cake? Not baby murderers or drug dealers or lone-wolf gunmen or rednecks or Monkey People or nuclear destruction. Nope. Cakes.

"There is simply no room left for 'freedom from the tyranny of government' since city dwellers depend on it for food, power, water, transportation, protection, and welfare.
Your right to live where you want, with companions of your choosing, under laws to which you agree, died in the eighteenth century.
Only a miracle or a disaster could restore it."

W. S. Burroughs — Cities of the Red Night
.

#13 chasmatic (Link) on 2015-07-16 09:29 (Reply)

These laws are only applied against believing Christians. A litmus test to ferret them out. Soon we will have mandatory "sensitivity training classes" at work where you will be expected to affirm in writing that you approve of homosexuality and gay marriage, and if you don't, you will be fired for homophobia. Unfortunately, Romans 1:32 says Christians cannot sign that affirmation.

Obama has already said this is coming: "Shift in hearts and minds is possible. And those who have come so far on their journey to equality have a responsibility to reach back and help others join them . . . ."

#14 Jim on 2015-07-16 12:58 (Reply)

Oh no, that's only a part of it. Once one gets the taste for making people do things, there is never enough to go around.

#14.1 Assistant Village Idiot (Link) on 2015-07-16 23:31 (Reply)

Businesses can refuse to have customers who carry a gun - constitutional right. but businesses can not refuse (based on a religious conscientious objection, a constitutional right) a customer's request.

#15 Blick on 2015-07-18 00:37 (Reply)

The Supreme Court, knowing there are conflicting rights in the Gay rights issue, made a sorry-assed decision. They should have spelled out the conflicts and the solutions in their decision. Or directed congress to do so before their decision takes effect.

#16 Blick on 2015-07-18 00:41 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Wednesday, July 15. 2015

A ?