Why people are right about Duck Dynasty and wrong about cake makers

Some technical difficulties. Here is the full post by Tony Hupp

 

gay-cake-topperIts a cake.

I don’t think people are wrong about Duck Dynasty. (You’ll have to refer to previous posts on this blog for all the context). Although I mentioned “free speech” once, my post wasn’t about free speech in terms of the 1st amendment. Not all issues of “free speech” are about the 1st amendment. It’s not any different than a saying I grew up with, “We’ve all got free speech but you shouldn’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre.”  The phrase doesn’t have anything to do with the government. I know that some people quickly invoke the 1st amendment when free speech is mentioned, but simply because free speech is mentioned doesn’t mean it’s a 1st amendment issue. There is a social and cultural aspect to free speech independent of the 1st amendment, and that’s what people are responding to. The continual back and forth about use of the N word is but one example of what I’m referring to.

By the way, let’s dispense with one thing. If you disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, it doesn’t mean it’s about “hate.” That a cheap technique people on the far left try to use to make you feel bad about what you believe. Just because you may have issues with a homosexual lifestyle doesn’t mean you’re a homophobe. It’s just about trying to make you feel bad about what you think so you’ll be hesitant to express it, and feel bad if you do. It’s bullshit.

I agree someone in a workplace needs to be cognizant of what they say. Call your boss a name, be loud, obnoxious, profane, and it could cost you your job. Say something out of line and you can get canned. That’s not what this is about. This is about someone who expressed a religious belief, and got “suspended” for that belief. And, apparently, there is a significant population of people who have a problem with that. So, I don’t think, “They’re all wrong,” or “this is not an issue because it’s not about the 1stamendment.”  It’s important because people have decided it is. It’s a cultural issue, and people are starting to say they’ve had enough.

Does A&E have the right to fire him? I suppose. I think it’s simplistic just to say it’s their right. Like I said in my previous post, if you got fired for something you said in a bar on Friday night, you’d probably think differently. The Duck Dynasty crew has a right to take their show somewhere else, which apparently they are considering. That’s the way it should be. The Duck Dynasty crew has a right to say “Well, here’s what we’re going to do.”

In regards to the article about selling a wedding cake to a gay couple, here’s my take on it.

You sell cakes. That’s it. You sell cakes.

Do you not sell cakes to gay people? I don’t think you could say that because you can’t know. So you only refuse to sell cakes to gay people who are engaging in a civil union, based on your religious beliefs? Which religious belief is that? The “Though shalt not sell cakes to homosexuals engaging in civil unions.” I don’t remember that one. If you’re not selling cakes to this couple, would you sell a cake to a Buddhist? Or better yet, how about an atheist, would you sell a cake to them? Would you sell a cake to an atheist couple getting married? Because if so, would it indicate your support of those atheist couples?

I’m a self-professed non-Bible scholar. I’m out of my league here, however, if that’s what you’re going on as your reference, I understand there are many sins outlined in the Bible. Homosexuality is but one. As Phil said in his comments in GQ, ““Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”  There’s a lot of sins in there, I guess we’re being picky about the ones we discriminate against. Apparently mister cake-maker has decided to discriminate against just one.

I just haven’t been able to make a reasonable tie between: Selling cakes equals depriving someone of their religious beliefs. No one has stopped you from going to church or engaging in any of your religious practices.   Obviously, I would support your right to speak your disagreement with same-sex unions. How about this, “Well, I don’t agree with same-sex unions, but sure, I’ll sell you a cake.” You know, the whole “hate the sin, love the sinner” kind of stuff.

Selling a cake to a gay couple doesn’t mean you support gay marriage. It means you sell cakes.

You shouldn’t be able to not sell one just because you disagree with who’s buying it.

The whole thing is about respecting each other’s right to express opinions, but not discriminating against them because you disagree.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2519741/Judge-orders-bakeshop-serve-sex-customers-owner-REFUSED-make-rainbow-wedding-cake-gay-couple.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s