RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/08/2012

The baker plays the innocent? Bull sheet cake!

by Jeremy Hooper

Continuing the summer trend of turning all of us politicos into food writers, Family Research Council is yet again defending a company's anti-gay choices by turning the stone-caster into the "victim." Check out this justification:

Although [Masterpiece Cakes' Jack Phillips] explained that he draws the line at same-sex "weddings," he made it clear that he's happy to serve homosexuals. "If gays come in and want to order birthday cakes or any cakes for any occasion, graduations, or whatever, I have no prejudice against that whatsoever. It's just the wedding cake--not the people, not their lifestyle." Even that didn't stop the threats. [FRC]

What, is a tiered cake closer to heaven and therefore more offensive to God? Or are same-gender cake toppers the final straw that turns an act of business into a act of blasphemy? I ask seriously: What added-on aesthetic turns a commercial bake job into a morality litmus test?!? When does the fondant and butter cream cross the line?

And if this is the logic, then why should it stop with just LGBT people? What, is Mr. Phillips going to start asking customers if they've had premarital sex or been divorced? Is he going to start asking if the customer plans to use his or her dozen of Devil's Food cupcakes for literal Satan worship? Is every exercise in pastry going to come with an evaluation of both fitness and intent?!

This is pure nonsense. If a bakery offers a certain kind of cake, then the baker should be in the business of selling that cake regardless of personal view. And if not? Then he or she must be ready to face the scrutiny and or potential repercussions that come from the decision. It is patently absurd for Mr. Phillips and his defenders to deny pre-judging, when he is FULLY ADMITTING that he is judging the intent attached to certain customers' (but not other customers') requested purchases. The discrimination in this case is completely undeniable, regardless of your view or political agenda! The aggressor is clearly cast, regardless of his defenders' deceptive attempt to hijack "victim" status.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails