Ever heard of Le Pétomane?
Dont want to know.
He finally worked up the courage to audition for the famous Moulin Rouge nightclub in Paris in 1892. The job interview consisted of him dropping his trousers, cleansing his “instrument” by sucking up water (he normally gave himself five enemas per day), then serenading the owner. The owner, flabbergasted, hired him immediately.
Audiences didn’t know what to make of Le Pétomane at first, but within two years he’d become the highest-paid performer in France, earning 20,000 francs for some shows, more than double what the legendary actress Sarah Bernhardt did.
Point it out in the bible.
The plate should look amazing. It is art. But, imagine if table 5 says they want their food arranged so it looks like a swastika. Imagine the cook is Jewish. Should he be required to accommodate the customer even though he finds it morally offensive?
A pink cake with blue frosting is comparable to food arranged like a swastika?
Is that really the example you want to use to make your point?
Why not? It is just food artistically arranged. It still tastes the same, right?
I wouldn’t make the comparison. I feel if you have a point, you don’t have to go straight to nazism, unless, of course, the topic is nazis.
Did the NYT bother to mention this? I won’t be surprised if the answer is no.
*In the past year alone, Phillips has declined several requests to create custom cakes because of the messages that they would have communicated or the events that they would have celebrated. Phillips believes that many of these requests are not genuine; rather, they are setups designed to get him to decline the desired message. Phillips believes that the originator of a number of these requests is attorney Autumn Scardina. In late September 2017, someone emailed Phillips asking for a custom cake “to celebrate” Satan’s “birthday.” The customer requested that the cake have “red and black icing” and include “an upside down cross, under the head of Lucifer.” The customer described the cake as “religious in theme” and reminded Phillips that “religion is a protected class.” Phillips declined to create that cake because it included designs that would have expressed messages in violation of his religious beliefs.
A few days later, someone called Phillips asking for a similar custom cake. Phillips noticed that “Scardina” appeared on the caller-identification screen. Phillips believes that the caller was Autumn Scardina. The caller asked Phillips to create a “birthday” cake for Satan. The caller requested that the cake feature a red and black theme and an image of Satan smoking marijuana.
Phillips declined to create that cake because it included designs that would have expressed messages in violation of his religious beliefs. On June 4, 2018, the day that the Supreme Court issued its Masterpiece decision, someone emailed Phillips claiming to be “a member of the Church of Satan.” That person asked for the following custom cake
I cut it off there because the request was a vulgar one, plus can only quote small portions of an article anyway due to copyright.
Anyway, it’s VERY clear this man has been targeted repeatedly for harassment, which is exactly why he is going on the offensive now. Good for him.
And I bet he will win against the haters once again.
2 Likes
The point remains. Should the cook be required to arrange the food in a manner he finds offensive or repugnant to his religious beliefs?
1 Like
I would say that the establishment puts itself into a grey area when it allows custom orders for some customers, and refuses custom orders to entire classes of other customers. Hopefully that discrimination isn’t against a protected class of people. I’m pretty sure that Nazism isn’t a protected class in America though.
Oh, and the Colorado governor was being deliberately misleading in saying this:
On Wednesday, Gov. John Hickenlooper, who is named in the Phillips lawsuit, spoke to the controversy.
“Certainly I can’t imagine we have a vendetta against anyone,” Hickenlooper said. “But it seems to me you shouldn’t be able to withhold your services or products from someone else based on their religion.”
For the millionth time, he is NOT withholding products or services from anyone, with the exception of cakes with certain messages.
If a gay person requested a cake that said “Happy birthday Mom” he would not be denied. But if someone requested a Halloween cake, or a cake that praised the KKK, the baker would refuse that request.
But those same customers could buy cookies, pies, etc from that baker.
I’m so sick of the way the left is lying about this.
2 Likes
The lawyer wants a plain cake. No message. Pink on the inside. Blue on the outside.
That’s offensive?
This is one reason why I became a conservative and would NEVER vote for a liberal ever again. They want the state to have the power to force people to do things against their conscience.
2 Likes
Because he told the baker exactly what the cake was for. Stop being so dishonest about this.
2 Likes
You found my example morally repugnant? I was stooping to a low you didn’t like? A Jewish cook who has a request by a customer to arrange food in the design of a swastika?
Well, if you didn’t like my example, then welcome to the world of the Baker. You’ve kind of made his argument for him.
2 Likes
What’s it for?
That’s why it’s discrimination. The baker would otherwise make this EXACT same cake… for a different customer who was celebrating something else.
Read the article I cited. The lawyer made it perfectly clear what the cake was for.
And he targeted the baker DELIBERATELY.
Only in your world does arranging food like a swastika = making a pink cake with blue frosting.
That’s not my point. The religious beliefs part is bogus. The Bible says nothing about gay marriage, wedding cakes, signing contractual agreements, or two males/females living together. The bible says nothing about people with male brains and female bodies or vice-verse.
My point here is about freedom of speech. When an artist creates a product, they are expressing speech. If the artist is uncomfortable making the product for personal reasons (Phillips’ anti-gay, anti-trans views are personal, not religious), then their rights are being violated if they are being forced upon.
The problem in this discussion is that we have two worlds colluding with each other. The transgender/gay couple should never be discriminated against. It’s a free country. It should be free for everybody. On the other hand, the artist has rights and should be free to choice which products he wants to make.
My line is this: If the artist is uncomfortable making the product, he/she should make a generic item, and have the customer decorate/color it as they wish. That’s a fair compromise between the two “rights” being clashed.
