The decision to force the bakery to change its business practices reflects a mistaken concept of rights. Those who support government intervention in this case view rights as a gift from government. Therefore, they think politicians and bureaucrats can and should distribute and redistribute rights. This view holds it is completely legitimate to use government force to make bakeries bake cakes for same-sex weddings since the government-created right to a cake outweighs the rights of property and contract.
This view turns the proper concept of rights on its head. Rights are not gifts from government, so the government cannot restrict them unless we engage in force or fraud. The bakery did not use force to stop any same-sex couple from getting a wedding cake. It simply exercised its right to decide who it would accept as a customer. No one would support private individuals forcing bakery employees to bake a cake at gunpoint, so why is it right for the government to do it?
Some people claim that forcing the bakery to bake the cake is consistent with libertarianism. The reason they make this claim is they view the bakery’s actions as rooted in bigotry toward homosexuals. But even if this were true, it would not justify government intervention. Bigots and others with distasteful views have the right to use their property as they choose. The way to combat bigotry is through boycotts and other means of peaceful persuasion.
More
4 comments:
Let them eat cake.
So why didn't the gay couple go somewhere else? We are supposed to have some freedoms in this country, particularly when it comes to the freedom of religion. If someone chose to not serve me in their place of business for whatever reason, I'd simply go elsewhere to do business. The gay community have become foolishly stupid.
If a KKK member went into a black owned bakery and asked for a Grand Wizard cake, I imagine there would be no outcry when they tossed them out in the street...
They are so selective with which companies/persons fall under this discrimination thing. For instance, the people in the coffee shop a couple of days ago who were refused service for wearing MAGA hats. How can they refuse to serve coffee to someone for the type of hat they wear and yet this baker cannot refuse service to a gay couple. Does the law only apply because they are gay?
Post a Comment