"The Discrimination isn't Against the Person, but the Event" (parties, financial)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can anyone explain how an event like say a same-sex marriage can be discriminated against and it isn't the homosexuals getting married themselves? I've seen this in a thread about the Supreme Court taking up the baker case and I don't get the logic of "The discrimination isn't against the person, but rather the event."
Can anyone explain how an event like say a same-sex marriage can be discriminated against and it isn't the homosexuals getting married themselves? I've seen this in a thread about the Supreme Court taking up the baker case and I don't get the logic of "The discrimination isn't against the person, but rather the event."
Because the baker said right up front that the marriage was what was disapproved of. Same sex marriage was claimed to be against his religious beliefs. The discrimination was against the event.
In all likelihood if a person went to that baker to order a special cake for a grandmother's birthday party, the baker would take the order and provide the cake because he would have no reason to disapprove of birthday parties for grandmothers.
Because the baker said right up front that the marriage was what was disapproved of. Same sex marriage was claimed to be against his religious beliefs. The discrimination was against the event.
In all likelihood if a person went to that baker to order a special cake for a grandmother's birthday party, the baker would take the order and provide the cake because he would have no reason to disapprove of birthday parties for grandmothers.
.
O.K. But how is it not about the individuals? Had the individuals been one woman and one man, the baker would have no problem. Instead it is two men or women and it is. That is discrimination.
O.K. But how is it not about the individuals? Had the individuals been one woman and one man, the baker would have no problem. Instead it is two men or women and it is. That is discrimination.
In the baker's case I don't think it would necessarily have to be about the individuals because the baker didn't know the individuals, they were complete strangers and he didn't know for a fact that they were homosexuals, he assumed it. For all he knew they could have been a couple of straight people who were getting a same-sex marriage for some personal and financial conveniences that had nothing to do with their sex lives. Sex isn't the only reason for people to get married.
I think if a man and woman together had come into his shop and said they wanted to order a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage the result would have been the same. They'd have met with refusal from the baker because the cake was for a same-sex marriage. It was the event - the marriage - that he was discriminating against. Which ever way you look at it, the fact is that the baker was discriminating about something that was none of his business and that he knew nothing about. He's just supposed to provide a cake service, not pass judgement on any of his customers or their intended purposes for the cakes he provides.
Because the baker said right up front that the marriage was what was disapproved of. Same sex marriage was claimed to be against his religious beliefs. The discrimination was against the event.
In all likelihood if a person went to that baker to order a special cake for a grandmother's birthday party, the baker would take the order and provide the cake because he would have no reason to disapprove of birthday parties for grandmothers.
.
But these are social events they cannot occur with human beings.
If you don't bake cakes for Grandmothers' birthdays because you disapprove of this event, then there is no way you are not discriminating against the human beings for whom the event is being held. The event would not exist without the human beings involved.
The baker is doing doubletalk. Sounds like a Christian version of the type of reasoning found in Orwell's 1984.
In the baker's case I don't think it would necessarily have to be about the individuals because the baker didn't know the individuals, they were complete strangers and he didn't know for a fact that they were homosexuals, he assumed it. For all he knew they could have been a couple of straight people who were getting a same-sex marriage for some personal and financial conveniences that had nothing to do with their sex lives. Sex isn't the only reason for people to get married.
I think if a man and woman together had come into his shop and said they wanted to order a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage the result would have been the same. They'd have met with refusal from the baker because the cake was for a same-sex marriage. It was the event - the marriage - that he was discriminating against. Which ever way you look at it, the fact is that the baker was discriminating about something that was none of his business and that he knew nothing about. He's just supposed to provide a cake service, not pass judgement on any of his customers or their intended purposes for the cakes he provides.
.
I'm the more recent case aka the one going in front of the Supreme Court, the baker knew the customers (not sure if was just as customers or what.) The issue I have is that without two homosexuals marrying (I'm lumping in shams because who knows what marriage is or isn't a sham) you cannot have a same-sex wedding. Without the people, there isn't an event like another poster replied about granny.
Similar logic to yours: Don't hate the player... hate the game."
It doesn't work for dope dealers either.
I think it is a way of trying to talk out of the bigoted view that business owners shouldn't be forced to deal with whomever. In the case of same-sex marriage, makers, catering, venues and DJ/band.
O.K. But how is it not about the individuals? Had the individuals been one woman and one man, the baker would have no problem. Instead it is two men or women and it is. That is discrimination.
Simple. Your fallacy is assuming only gay people can order cakes for gay events or that gay people only order cakes for gay events.
If a man and a woman came into the shop and said "we're happily married and straight but we want to order a same-sex marriage cake for some friends", what do you think the baker would have done? I say he would have declined to make such a cake and refused their business. Clearly his objections are to the event, or more accurately his role as a participant in the event, not the persons ordering the cake.
If two men came into the shop and said "we're flaming gay and we want to order a birthday cake", what do you think the baker would have done? I say he would have been happy to make such a cake. Clearly he has no objections to doing business with gay persons.
Simple. Your fallacy is assuming only gay people can order cakes for gay events or that gay people only order cakes for gay events.
If a man and a woman came into the shop and said "we're happily married and straight but we want to order a same-sex marriage cake for some friends", what do you think the baker would have done? I say he would have declined to make such a cake and refused their business. Clearly his objections are to the event, or more accurately his role as a participant in the event, not the persons ordering the cake.
If two men came into the shop and said "we're flaming gay and we want to order a birthday cake", what do you think the baker would have done? I say he would have been happy to make such a cake. Clearly he has no objections to doing business with gay persons.
He didn't but as I mentioned who knows if the baker knew before or if it was revealed when contacted for the cake.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
