Rights to duties on cakes
Headline on toxic sludge from George Will:

Baking a Cake Is Not Constitutionally Protected Speech

I don't need to read the sludge. The headline is poison enough.

I'm terminally tired of idiots missing the OBVIOUS POINT. The cake is NOT THE ISSUE. The problem would be the same for WORDS AND SYMBOLS placed on any sort of product. Words on a poster, words on a statue, decals on a car, symbols on a flag.

The problem is that the artist or craftsman is FORCED BY GOVERNMENT to EXPRESS a belief that he doesn't share. If we had a "constitution" that "protected" "speech" "and" "religion", this would be the exact HEART of the need to protect speech and religion. Since we do not have a constitution, the issue is moot, but it's still worth discussing as a sort of sci-fi fantasy.

Most modern craftsmen aren't bothered by the set of beliefs involved in these cases, but everyone has some beliefs that are abhorrent, some words and symbols that would ruin the soul if FORCIBLY expressed. (Hint to activists: Ask the usual artist to make a cake or painting that says "I love Trump". If you survive the beating, sue.)

Turning the issue from "rights" to duties: The government has a duty to STAY THE FUCK OUT of religious matters. As soon as the government REQUIRES one religion, the government then has a duty to perform ALL the functions of that one religion.

Theocracy works efficiently in a small country where everybody belongs to the same religion. In that situation the moral codes of the religion prevent crime, encourage labor and frugality, and keep families together. Government has much less work to do.

In a big country with lots of denominations, the only practical approach is to STAY THE FUCK OUT of religion. Any sort of partial theocracy generates rebellion by the victims of the theocracy, which then requires a pogrom. And that's where we are right now. Sorosian theocracy, pogrom against non-Sorosians.

Labels: From rights to duties

  ¶ 3:02 AM