Let us undertake, shall we, a study in contrasts. What I would like to do is compare the conservative desire to refrain from violating conscience in certain business transactions and the progressive desire (progressive, progressive . . . where were we going again?) to refrain from the same.
As you may recall—it was quite a few months ago now—there were a number of causes célèbres involving evangelical bakers, florists, and photographers, who objected to being dragooned into celebrations of occasions that they did not want to celebrate. As I argued a number of times, the issue was not living in the same society with those we believed to be living immorally, or even doing business with them. The issue was doing the kind of business that required celebratory participation. In other words, the reason the controversies tended to surround the celebratory professions is that celebration is the point where evangelicals balked.
Put another way, the baker was happy to make a birthday cake for the homosexual customer because helping to celebrate a birthday is not problematic. There is no issue of conscience when homosexuals have birthdays. The sticking point came when it was demanded that people of conscience celebrate the sin itself. In all the cases I know of, when it came to that sticking point, the person involved begged off politely. They simply demurred and found themselves in the world of lawyers.Their feelings have been pampered, fêted, flattered, and fed peeled grapes for several decades now. And we’ve got the tantrums to prove it.
Now fast forward to what we are dealing with now. For reasons having mostly to do with divine providence, the shoe is on the other foot and progressives are freaking out. Notice that all the qualifications that evangelicals used to make are simply wadded up and thrown into an emotional blast furnace. Progressives are having themselves a hissy fit for the ages, and they do object to living in the same society with people who crossed them in any way. And it is not a matter of violating their consciences, which were cauterized a long time ago, but rather a matter of violating their feelings. Their feelings have not been cauterized. Their feelings have been pampered, fêted, flattered, and fed peeled grapes for several decades now. And we’ve got the tantrums to prove it.
They have absolutely no commitment to the rights of those who differ with them. They want to ostracize, to banish, to shut down, or humiliate anyone who gets in the way of their agenda. Whether it is Ivanka’s clothing line, or the NFL threatening Texas with no more Super Bowls if they don’t fix their normal bathrooms pronto, or rioters at Berkeley, or fashion designers saying that they will not adorn Melania, or Airbnb insisting that its customers conform to their sexual ideology, or the GrubHub CEO who threatened to fire any workers who voted for Trump, we are faced with hostility across the board. They don’t distinguish between the wedding cake and the birthday cake. They simply want you gone.
But even so, on our end, this whole thing is a matter of principle, not partisan politics. Apart from using the state to impose penalties related to their disinclinations, they should be absolute free to knock themselves out. If they don’t want to decorate the First Lady, they shouldn’t have to. If they don’t want to bake me any kind of cake, then I should wish them a cheery good morning and be on my way. If they especially don’t want to bake me a birthday cake, for that would presuppose my continued existence, they should be free to embrace that sentiment.
I mean, shoot, it presupposes future blog posts. Think of that.
Love it.
Occupy Democrats now say the term “Snowflake” is an existential threat striking at the heart of civil society.
Soooooo go softly there pastor.
CNN says the same thing about “Fake News”. All the more reason to double down on the terms! ; – )
With prejudice! :)
So, serious question, not being a troll (on purpose)… That Christian who doesn’t want to bake the wedding cake… What if he’s a bit of a tool and doesn’t want to bake the birthday cake either? Clearly his local church should slap him around a bit, but what role if any does the government have in preventing that sort of discrimination? What if rather than because the customer is homosexual it is because he is black? When, if ever, should the government intervene in this sort of thing? Under what principles?
If someone wants to say “no thanks” (I‘m sure he’d be so polite . . . ) to that large a chunk of a customer base, he should be allowed to suffer the economic consequences.
What if it actually was good for business? (I can imagine a few scenarios where it might be.)
I agree with Bryce Young. He shouldnt have to bake a birthday cake either. He should be free to enter into a contract to make a cake for some or no compensation and he should be free to refuse any such contract for any such reason. He should be free to be as polite or impolite as he desires (up to the point of threatening physical harm – that would be assault and it is not allowed) in his refusal to enter into the contract. He shouldn’t be a tool, but he should be free to be a tool.
The corollary to freedom of association is the freedom not to associate, for any reason.
Why would you want to deny him that right?
No
Why?
Angsty millennial parents: “My kids just don’t understand me!”
Speaking of Super Bowl, why aren’t we demanding congress pass the bathroom thing on a national level?
The result of free competition in business: businesses that most efficiently attract customer dollars thrive. The result of free competition in political ideas: ideologies that most efficiently produce political power win. Things like logical consistency, impartiality, and charity would just slow it down. The natural destination of this process is the Terror. There are people who hold to some form of progressive beliefs in a consistent fashion. But they receive the same treatment as us reactionary cavemen the moment their beliefs are not up to date, and thus aren’t politically relevant. Since anyone to the right of the New York… Read more »
“Snowflake Wrath” is a really cool title and I’m stealing it for my list of volleyball team names. It reminds me however of “Muskrat Love”, which was never cool.
It might work for a band name too.
Yes. Beer too.
A Death Core band, for sure.
“Snowflake Wrath” That’s what cave men used to call glaciers! ; – )
And speaking from the position of a baker who has felt the public vengeance of the liberal left, I can’t emphasize enough the need to recognize and understand the point DW made that “they simply want you GONE”. Too many fair minded people think that everyone is fair minded and that we can all find a way to just get along. No. The extreme left is not interested in that. That is why they feel so free to be hypocrites. They will take no compromise. Everyone needs to wake up to that and then figure out how to live in… Read more »
It’s time for serious thought about how to organise our society so that progressives have no voice or control in how government, churches, and other institutions behave.
I bet your wife can bake a better birthday cake than they can anyhow.
“They have absolutely no commitment to the rights of those who differ with them. They want to ostracize, to banish, to shut down, or humiliate anyone who gets in the way of their agenda.” I’d like to believe that to be true, but than we have the Alt Right, which likes to engage in the precise same practice. Than there are the far right extremists,the white supremicists, the MRA’s, the Christian nationalists, and assorted other dangerous whack a doodles who do nothing to farther the cause of freedom themselves. A snowflake is just a snowflake, but keep firing your gun… Read more »
Is that bad?
The left’s reaction shows by nature / God’s natural revelation that homosexuals and their other trophy-sinners that they know they ought to be gone / cut off (Ex 20:13; Ro 1:26,27,32). So, in the risk mgmt of shrewdness (cf. Lk 16:8), the unrighteous left approves of eliminating/suppressing those others that claim to follow God’s word before those others might towards increasing obedience to God’s word eliminate/suppress them according to God’s word (Ex 20:13). The alt right reactively and similarly fights fire with fire; yet with some peace of conscience that they’re instinctive (Ro 2:14-15) reaction is rightly more consistent with… Read more »
Yes. The ultimate sin, is to use ‘than’ when ‘then’ should have been used.
I thought “If it was” rather than “If it were” took top billing closely followed by “me and Johnny” rather than placing the others first in the phrase.
You know full well that the Alt-Right is working under the rule of turnabout as fair play.
Left shouldna started nothin if they wanted there to be nothin.
…two wrongs don’t make a right…however they may make an alt-right. ;)
I still believe the alt right is a reaction, not the creator of, the regressive left. Do the alt right and the regressives deserve each other? To some extent, yes, but neither is particularly content to just attack each other – they simply broaden their definitions to include everyone who disagrees with them. So allowing either of them to practice their preferred methods of activism is unacceptable.
Yes, so call me crazy, but I am always waiting for the grown ups to arrive on the scene and start acting sensibly.
Memi, it’s against the law to spank other peoples’ children.
Especialy when the children in question are alleged adults. ; – )
Doug, I was curious if you had heard about Disqus’s new policy, and if you thought it held any implications for Blog & Mablog:
Disqus Goes Full Social Justice Warrior
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2017/02/09/disqus-goes-full-social-justice-warrior/
Cue Artie Johnson… “Zis is Velly interesting…”
Gary asked earlier: “That Christian who doesn’t want to bake the wedding cake… What if he’s a bit of a tool and doesn’t want to bake the birthday cake either?” I have a variation on that Q.: Suppose the State essentially compels the conscientious baker / florist / photographer to help celebrate — against his own conscience — that which is not worthy of celebration. And suppose that he complied, but only by using his professional talents to convey the imagery of death? Bouquets of dead roses and carnations. Cakes baked from unleavened flour, infested with maggots and frosted in greys… Read more »