What is a civil rights violation?
In Oregon they have decided that denying a homosexual couple a wedding cake is a civil rights violation… in other words, forcing one individual to bake a cake for another individual is not a civil rights violation, according to this ruling.
Whose rights are being violated? Or are Rights reserved only to Groups of People?
Recently a similar event surrounding wedding photo’s, taking place in New Mexico, perpetuates this line of thinking. I’m sure there are more.
This should be a pretty simple, straight forward, problem to address.
If you want to refuse service to anyone, you can. Why? Because it is your right…. at least it should be.
But here’s the rub…
You then should have to endure my showing up outside of your establishment with camera’s and as much attention as I can muster. Because it’s my right to condemn your behavior. Publically.
This is how a Free society handles things. But we have wandered far from a Free society.
So, If you want to be a bigot… discriminatory… racist… an a-hole… whatever… fine. Look for massive amounts of attention focused upon you. At least that’s what should happen. So why doesn’t it? What happened to not just ours’ but the media’s responsibility to shine sunlight on behavior that discriminates against the individual?
It has long been my assertion that news media is lazy… and biased. The reason I say this is politicians regularly get away with abuses of power, unless they subscribe to anything resembling an ideology the press disagrees with, in todays day and age it happens to be Personal Responsibility associated with Individual Liberty and Freedom.
When U.S. Citizens are subjected to violations of their civil rights, in the above case being force to provide services to someone they wish not to, instead of the press bringing the power of sunlight upon the behavior being enough we are told we must seek Government Force. Not to mention the press doesn’t want to have the expectation of performance to include a responsibility to address such problems. Combine that with those among us who wish to control others embracing Government as being the only resort and you have the reason we are here today.
When WE stop correcting, addressing or at a minimum displaying actions that discriminate against the individual we abdicate our power to the state. And it is impossible for the State to act in any way which “corrects” a problem that doesn’t diminish Individual Freedom and Liberty. The State is FORCE. And because of that, it should be avoided at ALL costs, not looked to as the Savior.
But we have been taught taking responsibility for our Freedom, Liberty and Safety is someone else’s job. I know you have heard this… “The police are the First Responders” thus We the People are not supposed to confront criminals. We are not supposed to confront bigots. We are not supposed to confront racists. We are told that our situation in life in someone else’s fault and by logical extension someone else’s responsibility. We are programmed to believe Government is not just an answer, but Government is the only answer.
In the above case, the Press should have been the answer. If this Cake Baker could have remained in business by refusing to Bake Cakes then, while a miracle, so be it. But EVERYBODY should have known about it and it should never, never, never have arrived before a judge. WE are the judge. WE choose to not spend our money with a Cake Baker who, for whatever reason I don’t care, discriminates against individuals.
I Blame Us. I Blame the Press.
As a result of our low expectations, desire not to get involved and abdication of our Personal Responsibilities to Government we have yet again lost an incremental amount of Freedom.
There isn’t much of it left.
January 24th, 2014 at 9:20 am
I believe something similar happened in my state a while back. On the one hand I thought ‘what a jerk’, but the community reaction bothered me more; the protesting, the public humiliation of the business owner. If the guy had refused to bake a cake for a group or person deemed undesirable by the masses because of that groups / individual choice to believe and act as they choose – white supremacists, Mormon polygamist, Tea Partier – He would have been praised and handed the key to the city.
I think people are completely loosing touch with what it means to live in a free country. We have to take the good with the bad.
January 24th, 2014 at 9:57 am
I agree. That is if we wish to be free.
January 24th, 2014 at 9:59 am
Have you figured out why I like the TEA party yet?
January 24th, 2014 at 10:02 am
I wasn’t sure you liked any party… but do tell.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:08 am
Fair enough, as the TEA party is not actually a party. But it is made up of individus that wish to return to the original intent of the Constituion. Considering I’m a cynic I don’t trust their words, but it’s a start. I also find when the press, the entire Democrat party and 80 percent of the Republican larty HATES you, it an endorsement. It’s similar to my rule of thumb of voting for the candidate with the fewest number of foreign dictator endorsements.
January 24th, 2014 at 10:55 am
I get that, I do see the TEA party as appearing to uphold the constitution and its original intent, and when everyone hates you, you must be doing something right. But I think there has to be a better way. What I mean by that is there has to be a way to protect individual freedoms, but also provide a way for individuals to better their lives. i have nothing against hard work, but I think it has gotten to the point where hard work is not enough – many are working hard at 3 jobs and it is not enough for them to meet the needs of their families. (On the other hand i don’t believe it is the responsibility of the rich to take care of the rest of society). In short, I find it very difficult to align myself with the TEA party- I don’t see a lot of compassion or understanding on their part – but it could be because I have been terribly misled by media coverage.
Oh – I know what you will say – compassion has nothing to do with the constitution. I suppose that is true –
January 24th, 2014 at 11:33 am
Rove has a visceral hatred of those guys. That’s because there is little difference between the establishment republicans and the democrats… they just fight over who gets to tell us what to do.
You’re right in terms of compassion not being part of the constitution, just as “fairness” is not. These concepts are undefinable, meaning they have different definitions to different people. Rather, as you lament, the constitution attempts to preserve the enviornment for us, as individuals, to exercise compassion as we see fit. Some will, to others satisfaction, some will not but that’s what it means to be free. However, when you’re working 3 jobs just to make ends meet it is impossible to help someone else in a meaningful way. And the greatest gift you can give all of us is to take care of yourself first, because only then can you decide to take care of someone else.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:47 am
Great points of course. I think what concerns me is how wide the gap between the haves and the have nots it getting. True, we all have personal definitions of what compassion is and how we choose to show our compassion and the choice is largely protected by The Constitution. The problem is when our right to the pursuit of happiness is hindered by greedy politicians all with their own agenda. There is a difference between protecting our rights and using the constitution to protect and excuse those who want to be the one who dies with the most toys.
January 24th, 2014 at 2:57 pm
Agreed. Which is why I believe we must return to upholding the Constitution and demanding all individuals equality before the law. It been a long time since the politicians have experienced that.
January 24th, 2014 at 3:12 pm
Just out of curiosity, without using the four letter “F” word, why are you concerned with the gap between the haves and the have nots? I understand being against the fascism which enriches our leaders, but I’m not sure about that statement. Who decides what constitutes a have and a have not. I’m a free society, is this a problem in need of solving? If so, would the free-market solution be to remove the protections and barriers to entry enjoyed by those in power? And if that is the solution, wouldn’t the only way to do that is remove the ability of our politicians to grant such protections? Which brings us back to the original intent of the Constitution.
January 24th, 2014 at 9:05 pm
Well, funny you should mention the “F” word – I think it is very different from compassion. Education is getting more expensive. I have two college bound kids and I’m not sure how they will get a higher education. This could be poor planning on my part, but things happen in life and sometimes the best laid plans get derailed. With that little concern of mine aside… this issue is nothing compared to the struggles many go through – getting food on the table, housing payments, transpiration cost etc. i am trying to paint a big picture here. I personally have a comfortable life, but we don’t live above our means and haven’t lived above our means for a very long time. The issue of the haves and have nots is an important one that needs to be solved by making education and training programs more affordable, raising wages, affordable housing and medical care… in this way individuals will have the ability to “pursue happiness’. Everyone would love to be rich for sure, but really I think people just want to be able to meet their NEEDS; have their kids go to bed with full bellies, in a warm house and possibly be able to make a quick run to the local drug store to by a bottle of OTC medicine for those kids when they are sick without worrying about the cost of that medicine cutting into their already stretched grocery budget, or that they only have enough gas to get them to work and back the next day, or God forbid the child is too sick to go to school or day care and they will have to call in sick and risk losing a days wages. You may think the number of people who live like this is small, but I think it is more than you realize. You may think, and in some cases be right, these people should have made better choices- been a better student to get that college scholarship, not had children they couldn’t afford. It would be great if life was like that, but it isn’t. Does that make the haves responsible for the have nots? Not necessarily, but I can tell you for every poor person struggling there is an equally lazy spoiled rich brat who just so happens to be able to glide through life because of “rich” parents. BUT, something needs to be done to ensure all people have access to the same opportunities – for the simple reason that it is best for society, for you, for me, for our economy. I’m no bleeding heart, lazy people annoy the crap out of me, but equally annoying are those who are so out of touch with how the average person has to live their lives. The audacity and stupidity of those privileged government officials who think if people just work harder their lives would improve… like when Bush (I think it was him) congratulated the woman who spoke about working two jobs to ensure her family had basic needs. ” Well how great is that – to live in a country where one can have TWO jobs” some stupid out in la la land response. I think it is pretty clear to see who is a have and who is a have not. Gee – I haven’t even gotten to the last two questions yet.
January 25th, 2014 at 12:35 am
Excellent. So let’s stay with the first question. I want to focus on college tuition in order to talk about market distortions. The reason college tuition is so high is because of the amount of taxpayer dollars being pushed into the system. The other reason is the idea that a college education somehow delivers a great paying job, or at least ENTITLES a person too one. Both are false. I can tell you from just my small circle of friends that the highest earners among us are not college graduates. But admittedly, that’s anecdotal. Back to the point. Market distortions are created when Money is artificially available to purchase something Otherwise not attainable. This causes the price of that product or service to increase, often it causes it to skyrocket. Such is the case with higher education. Demosterably, the best of intentions always result in unintended consequences.
I’ll wait for the next two rebuttals. This is the best exchange we’ve ever had Pout! Thank you!
January 25th, 2014 at 8:44 am
It’s true a college education is no guarantee of a good job. And I know many who are doing very well without a college degree. But it gives one an edge and it also opens their minds to new ideas which ultimately should enable a person to make better informed choices, enhance problem solving skills… and of course, I have met many educated idiots as well. … might be a while before I get to the other two. Glad to offer you a bit of entertainment though. You also brought back painful memories of my macro economics 101 class – which I was horrible at – very interesting class, but painful.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:35 am
Don’t misunderstand, I’m not a recruiter for the TEA Party. That’s not what we do here. This exercise is about thinking, not necessarily agreeing.
January 24th, 2014 at 11:48 am
Good to know… 🙂