4 ms·

This argument always comes up too and you end up with certain people trying to force others to bake cakes a certain way. The whole idea of “protected classes” s

This argument always comes up too and you end up with certain people trying to force others to bake cakes a certain way. The whole idea of “protected classes” spits in the face of free speech. I think free speech is a noble goal but can only really exist when we don’t live in a zero sum world. Until then: > "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean. Neither more or less." Alice responded to Humpty Dumpty, "The question is, whether you can make words mean so many different things?" Humpty Dumpty retorted: "The question is, which is to be master? That's all."

flangola7 4y ago
The cake thing isn't about speech but public accomodations.
- comte7092 4y ago
  Exactly, no one is barging into private homes and forcing people to bake cakes for strangers. It’s about what you’re required to do if you’re open for business to the public.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- imgabe 4y ago
  No it wasn’t. The issue was a custom made cake. The court ruled that the cake constituted an artistic expression (i.e. speech) on the part of the baker and they couldn’t be compelled to produce speech they disagreed with. If they just wanted a premade cake there would have been no issue. Suppose at some point gay marriage is overturned, and some conservative group goes to a gay baker and commissions a cake saying "Hooray no more gay marriage! God is good!". Should they be compelled to bake that cake since they can't discriminate on the basis of religion? You might disagree with that logic, but the ruling had to do with free speech, not public accommodations. Commissioning a custom work is not a public accommodation.
- yucky 4y ago
  It's scary how many people still parrot this line, which is 100% incorrect. The baker was happy to sell them a cake. They had many cakes in the store that they could have bought. The baker did not want to be compelled to create a custom cake (which he considered his artistic expression), to depict something he didn't agree with. Imagine forcing an Islamic baker to write "Mohammad was a dirty pedophile" on a cake. Same thing.
Zetice 4y ago
Protected classes are a whole different thing, about how what you are isn’t something someone can evaluate you by. There are so many “exceptions” to free speech, but acting like it’s all or nothing seems silly.

flangola7 4y ago

The cake thing isn't about speech but public accomodations.

comte7092 4y ago
Exactly, no one is barging into private homes and forcing people to bake cakes for strangers. It’s about what you’re required to do if you’re open for business to the public.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
imgabe 4y ago
No it wasn’t. The issue was a custom made cake. The court ruled that the cake constituted an artistic expression (i.e. speech) on the part of the baker and they couldn’t be compelled to produce speech they disagreed with. If they just wanted a premade cake there would have been no issue. Suppose at some point gay marriage is overturned, and some conservative group goes to a gay baker and commissions a cake saying "Hooray no more gay marriage! God is good!". Should they be compelled to bake that cake since they can't discriminate on the basis of religion? You might disagree with that logic, but the ruling had to do with free speech, not public accommodations. Commissioning a custom work is not a public accommodation.
yucky 4y ago
It's scary how many people still parrot this line, which is 100% incorrect. The baker was happy to sell them a cake. They had many cakes in the store that they could have bought. The baker did not want to be compelled to create a custom cake (which he considered his artistic expression), to depict something he didn't agree with. Imagine forcing an Islamic baker to write "Mohammad was a dirty pedophile" on a cake. Same thing.

Zetice 4y ago

Protected classes are a whole different thing, about how what you are isn’t something someone can evaluate you by. There are so many “exceptions” to free speech, but acting like it’s all or nothing seems silly.