I HAVE A DREAM ... ABOUT GAY WEDDING CAKES.... Ann Coulter

[mystery-ak]

162KShare to TwitterShare to PrintShare to FlipboardShare to More126K
I HAVE A DREAM ... ABOUT GAY WEDDING CAKES
June 6, 2018


The Supreme Court's recent decision on whether a Christian baker can be forced to make a wedding cake for a gay marriage (no) arriving on the same day that Bill Clinton reared his syphilitic head on NBC's "Today" reminded me how liberals always use black people as props.

Midway through the last century, bedrock legal principles about property rights and freedom of association were abrogated to deal with a specific, intractable problem: We could not get Democrats to stop discriminating against blacks.

So Republicans, with very little Democratic help, passed a slew of laws saying: No, even though you own that restaurant, you cannot discriminate against black customers. And no, even though we are a free people, you cannot refuse to associate with black people in your clubs, universities or sports teams.

This should have been a one-time exception to the law for one specific group of people based on an emergency.

more
http://www.anncoulter.com/

[WingNot]

the same day that Bill Clinton reared his syphilitic head

 

[INVAR]

I do not pay much attention to Miss Twiggy here at all but I did find myself in agreement with this paragraph:

Instead of basing favored treatment under the law on a history of brutal and widespread injustice in America, liberals thought it should also be based on other forms of suffering, such as: being a woman, being a Muslim, wanting an abortion, having been born in Mexico, being a smelly homeless person stinking up the public library and -- according to Ruth Bader Ginsburg this week -- being a gay couple who wants to force a Christian to bake a cake for your wedding.

Of interest is how often the SCROTUS uses the term 'dignity' when declaring a mandatory deference to the new caste of preferred persons and behaviors they create by decree.

[goatprairie]

I'll bet that there a plenty of liberal-run businesses that would refuse to accede to demands from religious or right wing groups to make or style products they, the liberal business, didn't want to do.
But conservatives (religious or otherwise) being the peaceable, law-abiding, nonintrusive people they usually are, would just go to another business to get what they wanted.
 If some business refused to make their product with religious symbols on it, should a Christian customer get to demand they put them on? I don't think so. I don't think any customer should be able to demand a business make a product the way they want. They can request, but they can't demand.  And I don't care what Burger King does.

[roamer_1]

So Republicans, with very little Democratic help, passed a slew of laws saying: No, even though you own that restaurant, you cannot discriminate against black customers. And no, even though we are a free people, you cannot refuse to associate with black people in your clubs, universities or sports teams.

This should have been a one-time exception to the law for one specific group of people based on an emergency.

NO. In fact, it should not have happened at all. Unintended consequences.

It was not easy being Japanese in this country after WWII, nor Vietnamese after Nam. And in fact, there was a time when it was not easy being an Irishman in the Northeast. All of these peoples experienced horrible racism, but proved themselves (largely because they had to) by their drive and industry. Yet in all these cases, while assimilation was grievously hard, they did succeed.

Creating a protected group or class necessitates protection, which soon enough turns into protected places - And the ghetto becomes as impossible to escape as the reservation or the plantation.

A free people stands on its own two feet - In creating a protected class of any sort, one declares they cannot stand on their own - In which the unintended consequence is to make them less than free by the nature of the thing.

That is the difference between the protected classes and those who were not protected and rose to the occasion.

[INVAR]

I'll bet that there a plenty of liberal-run businesses that would refuse to accede to demands from religious or right wing groups to make or style products they, the liberal business, didn't want to do.

You can ask Lois Lerner about that specifically.

Or look at Youtube and Facebook scrubbing and deleting accounts containing political ideas and subjects it does not like.  The Left does it every single day.

But God forbid you deny a homo his cake or his parade or his perceived right to force you to accept him.  By golly THEN we gonna get the feds and courts on your ass because you discriminated!  And protected classes and perverted behaviors are more equal than everyone else's in the realm of public accommodation.