Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
(Post 1958387)
this is where it's important to understand the intent behind anti-discrimination laws
people who want "death to all homos" written on **** would not be under a protected class, and should not be
the laws are not meant to give you the right to demand anything you want from a business
sexuality and gender identity is not yet a federally protected class, but I'd argue, and I'd venture to say you'd agree, that it should be
|
Right. But we aren't talking about this, or at least I'm not, in respect to the ACTUAL case. Read the reaction details from the Justices. The baker was not denying the couple his service on any of his other goods. Just the personalized wedding cake. He simply did not, under his religious beliefs, feel comfortable making them the cake. That doesn't make him a bigot. It makes him a narrow sighted and stupid man. The dude even offered the numbers of other bakers that would accommodate them.
This isn't a case about discrimination. It's a case about whether the owner of a private business has the right to decline making a client a personalized cake, which could kind of be construed as a piece of art, and the state and this couple went after him as if he was a bigot.
I've changed my tune a bit after actually reading the details of the case. The couple seems like they want to be victimized and garner attention. This isn't the way to do it. |
