• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Should bakers be forced to make gender transition celebration cakes?

Of course he is, for the reasons already explained in this thread.

Assertions are not explanations.
I actually don't think bakers (or anyone else) should be "forced" to do anything they don't want to do (which was the OP question).
If they choose to break laws and suffer the consequences, so be it.
Still, nobody is going to physically force them to bake cakes at all, let alone "gender change confirmation celebration" cakes.
What a silly assertion.

They are still being forced, because if they refuse to bake the cakes, the government will use force to shut down their place, and of course that includes force against them if they resist

Call the Waaaambulance. I am being “forced” to stop at red lights, wear seat belts, pay taxes, shovel sidewalks and modify my products to conform with government regs.
Just part of living in a civilized society. The baker is free to contest the legalities of those requirements or to relocate to somewhere without them. To pretend that someone is twisting their arm is totally specious.
 
Elixir said:
Call the Waaaambulance.
What's that?

Elixir said:
I am being “forced” to stop at red lights, wear seat belts, pay taxes, shovel sidewalks and modify my product to conform with government regs.
No, you're not being "forced" to do that. You're being forced to do that.
Fortunately, you are not being forced to express an opinion you disagree with. At least, not by the government as far as I know. Philips is less lucky.
Elixir said:
Just part of living in a civilized society.
Being forced to do some things is part of living in any human society, civilized or otherwise.

Some instances of forcing are acceptable government behavior. Some aren't. Some are just. Some aren't. And so on.

Elixir said:
The baker is free to contest the legalities of those requirements or to relocate to somewhere without them.
We've been through that. You can say the same with respect to anything the government forces people to do, as long as there is a court system. It tells you nothing about whether it is just, morally acceptable on the part of the government, allowed by the courts, constitutional, etc.

Moreover, even people forced to pay "protection" to the mob can often relocate. Obviously, that does not mean they're not being forced to pay "protection".

Elixir said:
To pretend that someone is twisting their arm is totally specious.
If you mean literally twisting their arm, sure. But no one is pretending that.
If you mean metaphorically twisting their arm, well it depends on your metaphor. But no one is pretending that. Because no one is pretending anything. Some of us are showing that he is being forced, and reckoning he's being unethically forced (and unconstitutionally forced).
 
Jews, gays, Roma, etc. weren't forced into death camps like Dachau. They chose to stay in Germany! [/snarky sarcasm]
Tom
 
Angra said:
Being forced to do some things is part of living in any human society, civilized or otherwise.

Exactly. This baker is as free to contest the law he violates as I am to protest having to shovel snow outside my business. In the meanwhile, if I don’t pay the fine for not doing it they can shut down my business.

Some instances of forcing are acceptable government behavior. Some aren't. Some are just. Some aren't. And so on.
.

Newsflash: We don’t get to decide these things as individuals.
 
Jews, gays, Roma, etc. weren't forced into death camps like Dachau. They chose to stay in Germany!

But most of those Jews were White people and so they never had to deal with discrimination, prejudice, and mistreatment, so we can ignore that.
 
Jews, gays, Roma, etc. weren't forced into death camps like Dachau. They chose to stay in Germany!

But Jews are White people and so they never had to deal with discrimination, prejudice, and mistreatment, so we can ignore that.

Of course, I don't remember this personally.
But my grandparents remembered the days before Irish Catholics were considered white.
Tom
 
Brown and black people are noted to be particularly anti-trans. You then note the brown and black people here who support the baker over the trans person. Many gay people are also anti-trans, you've noted the gay people who support the baker. That's why I wondered if you wanted to go down that road.

I'm going to push back on this. I don't believe that any material number of ethnic minorities or homosexuals, or women for that matter, are "anti-trans". Rather, we're "anti-transgender-ideology".

A not insignificant number of women are completely supportive of transgender people being protected from mistreatment, having equal and fair access to housing, employment, and medical care. But those of us who object to the rhetoric do NOT accept that transgender people are in any way the actual sex that they identify as. Transwomen are not women - they're transgender identified men who wish to live as women. The lobbyist and activist approach to transgender 'rights' has been to replace sex as a protected category in law with 'gender identity', where that gender identity is completely internal and self-declared, with no objective measurement and no requirements of any kind. This has the effect of reducing the rights of women and increasing our risk of harm. It results in male-bodied people competing as women in the Olympics, despite the clear advantages of having a male body. It results in male people, who have been raised and conditioned as men, with all of the advantages of being a man in society being acclaimed as the "highest paid female CEO" or the "funniest female comedian" or being placed on short-lists for "female authors" or taking a position as a "female representative" in politics. It results in male bodied people, with no diagnosis and no medical treatment of any kind, being placed in shared cells with female prisoners. It results in males - with intact genitalia - being granted spaces in female-only rape and domestic violence shelters as a right. These are all things that affect females, but don't affect males. Women end up facing a two-pronged attack on this topic: transgender people who want to encroach on female spaces and support system as an entitlement, and men who are sympathetic to their plight and who do not seem to care about the cost being borne by women.

A fair number of homosexual people oppose transgender ideology, because it erases the entire concept of sexual orientation - something that gay men and lesbians fought long and hard to get acknowledged. Transgender ideology replaces sex with 'gender identity', and then redefines homosexuality to be 'attraction to the same gender identity' rather than to the same sex. This then gets used as to harass and condemn gay and lesbian people who don't want to have sex with transgender people. It has hit lesbians especially hard, where they are told that they have 'vagina fetishes' and are 'transphobes' because they don't want to consider transgender identified men as part of their sexual and romantic pool. They are subject to harassment, threats, and coercion if they don't want to engage in penis-in-vagina sex with 'transbians'. There are entire workshops out there for transgender identified men on how to overcome the "cotton ceiling" so they can work their way into the underwear of lesbians. Publications and organizations that advertise themselves as for the "LGBT" community publish articles with tips for lesbians on how to have sexual interactions with the penises of transwomen. It all comes with a very strong "just try it, you'll like it... you only don't like dick because you haven't tried mine" vibe to it. That's a particular sort of sexual coercion that lesbians have faced for a very long time, and just recently when that pressure was beginning to fade... now it's come back and is being pushed by the very organizations that purport to support lesbians and gay men.

When it comes to ethnicity, I can't speak in generalized terms. I know that at least some of it is a result of religion. But I also know a LOT of black and hispanic women who are extremely opposed to transgender ideology for the reasons listed above for women in general. But they tend to be much more vocal about it, because they are the ones who are most directly affected. There is a considerably higher proportion of black women in prison than there are white women in the US... so it is black women who face the risk of having their transgender cellmate rape and impregnate them because the justice system is taking the path of placing gender identity as a feeling above the reality of biological sex. There is a significantly higher rate of rape and domestic violence in black and hispanic communities, and a much higher proportion of women of color make use of domestic violence and rape shelters than do white women.

The thing that all of these people have in common is that we do not hate transgender people at all. We are not "anti-trans". We don't want transgender people harmed or discriminated against. But we're not willing to sacrifice our safety and our rights to provide entitlements to transgender people - entitlements that no other group of people has.

These are all groups of people who have directly faced disadvantage as a result of an innate, immutable characteristic of their lives, one over which they have no control. We can't "identify" out of being female or male. We can't "identify" out of being black or brown or white. We can't "identify" out of being sexually attracted to people of our own sex, or of the opposite sex. And we all understand how vitally important freedom of speech and freedom of belief are to us - because that is the means by which we've been able to make progress in the world. It was the first amendment that allowed the protests, marches, public speeches, rallies, and petitions that got minorities equal civil rights ,that got women the right to vote*, that got acceptance of homosexuality and allowed gay and lesbian couples to get married.
 
that got women the right to vote*

I had intended to add a footnote, but forgot.

Are you aware that to this very day, women do NOT have equal protection under the law? The constitution does NOT grant women equal access to rights, it only grants us the right to vote.
 
If that's the way this is supposed to go, then why don't you go ahead and explain to me how it is that you do not fully support #BLM when they decry discrimination, prejudice, and mistreatment. I mean, they are "the people who have ACTUALLY faced discrimination, prejudice, and mistreatment" in that context, so we should only accept their side of the argument, right?

Lol, okay buddy. Why have you imagineered that I don't support BLM?

Or have you somehow decided that the only way to support BLM is to support vandalism, arson, and violence done in the name of BLM, while not actually being done by BLM?
 
Emily was perfectly correct.

That person doesn't exist. It's relevant since we're talking about identities.
She doesn't exist, why? Because "Emily Lake" is a pen name? I'm pretty sure "Don2 (Don1 Revised)" isn't your real name either, so I guess you don't exist. Because she took her pen name from a fictional character she saw on TV? That's where "Bomb#20" came from too, so I guess you're telling me I don't exist. Because the TV show she got the name from has been cancelled? If you think that makes our Emily Lake not exist then you're taking "cancel culture" way too literally. :biggrin:

blah blah blah Metaphor, not Jarhyn.
Whatever you're on about, take it up with them.

And that's not the only thing this non-existent person named Emily was incorrect about either. The idea that her entire out-group in this thread never experienced discrimination, prejudice, or mistreatment is a contradiction in terms...
Hey man, I'm not going to get into a line-by-line defense of everything she ever said with you. She's a big girl eminently capable of speaking for herself. All I'm saying is, like I said, she was perfectly correct that "Bigot" is the secular zealot's stand-in for "unbeliever". As for the rest, we all make mistakes. She makes more mistakes than I do, since I of course make the fewest. ;) You make more mistakes than she does. Jarhyn makes more mistakes than you do. So if you have a problem with something she said, talk to her about it. Assuming you can bring yourself to talk to a person you believe doesn't exist.

:eating_popcorn:
 
It's a similar thing you said to Jarhyn, except that your name is not a source of prejudice, discrimination and mistreatment.

Lol... omg just lol so much.

Telling Jarhyn that he is not, in actual reality, a wizard... is "similar" to saying a person doesn't exist?

Honestly, what they hell has happened to people's ability to use their brains? Is this a side effect of legalizing marijuana? A gas leak? Lead in the soy milk?
 
It's a similar thing you said to Jarhyn, except that your name is not a source of prejudice, discrimination and mistreatment.

Lol... omg just lol so much.

Telling Jarhyn that he is not, in actual reality, a wizard... is "similar" to saying a person doesn't exist?

Honestly, what they hell has happened to people's ability to use their brains? Is this a side effect of legalizing marijuana? A gas leak? Lead in the soy milk?

Nothing has happened. You just seem to be wholely incapable of looking through someone else's perspective.

Rather, your posts drip with derision to the idea that anyone could possibly know more about the universe than Emily Lake does, in any way, about any thing.

Most often, I find that people deny the language I use to describe reality because it lays bare the fact that we are surrounded with wonders that we take for granted merely because they are largely ubiquitous. I just don't pretend it's not amazing to be able to wield these forces merely because I was born into the world amidst its Age of Wonders.
 
Brown and black people are noted to be particularly anti-trans. You then note the brown and black people here who support the baker over the trans person. Many gay people are also anti-trans, you've noted the gay people who support the baker. That's why I wondered if you wanted to go down that road.

I'm going to push back on this. I don't believe that any material number of ethnic minorities or homosexuals, or women for that matter, are "anti-trans". Rather, we're "anti-transgender-ideology".

A not insignificant number of women are completely supportive of transgender people being protected from mistreatment, having equal and fair access to housing, employment, and medical care. But those of us who object to the rhetoric do NOT accept that transgender people are in any way the actual sex that they identify as. Transwomen are not women - they're transgender identified men who wish to live as women. The lobbyist and activist approach to transgender 'rights' has been to replace sex as a protected category in law with 'gender identity', where that gender identity is completely internal and self-declared, with no objective measurement and no requirements of any kind. This has the effect of reducing the rights of women and increasing our risk of harm. It results in male-bodied people competing as women in the Olympics, despite the clear advantages of having a male body. It results in male people, who have been raised and conditioned as men, with all of the advantages of being a man in society being acclaimed as the "highest paid female CEO" or the "funniest female comedian" or being placed on short-lists for "female authors" or taking a position as a "female representative" in politics. It results in male bodied people, with no diagnosis and no medical treatment of any kind, being placed in shared cells with female prisoners. It results in males - with intact genitalia - being granted spaces in female-only rape and domestic violence shelters as a right. These are all things that affect females, but don't affect males. Women end up facing a two-pronged attack on this topic: transgender people who want to encroach on female spaces and support system as an entitlement, and men who are sympathetic to their plight and who do not seem to care about the cost being borne by women.

A fair number of homosexual people oppose transgender ideology, because it erases the entire concept of sexual orientation - something that gay men and lesbians fought long and hard to get acknowledged. Transgender ideology replaces sex with 'gender identity', and then redefines homosexuality to be 'attraction to the same gender identity' rather than to the same sex. This then gets used as to harass and condemn gay and lesbian people who don't want to have sex with transgender people. It has hit lesbians especially hard, where they are told that they have 'vagina fetishes' and are 'transphobes' because they don't want to consider transgender identified men as part of their sexual and romantic pool. They are subject to harassment, threats, and coercion if they don't want to engage in penis-in-vagina sex with 'transbians'. There are entire workshops out there for transgender identified men on how to overcome the "cotton ceiling" so they can work their way into the underwear of lesbians. Publications and organizations that advertise themselves as for the "LGBT" community publish articles with tips for lesbians on how to have sexual interactions with the penises of transwomen. It all comes with a very strong "just try it, you'll like it... you only don't like dick because you haven't tried mine" vibe to it. That's a particular sort of sexual coercion that lesbians have faced for a very long time, and just recently when that pressure was beginning to fade... now it's come back and is being pushed by the very organizations that purport to support lesbians and gay men.

When it comes to ethnicity, I can't speak in generalized terms. I know that at least some of it is a result of religion. But I also know a LOT of black and hispanic women who are extremely opposed to transgender ideology for the reasons listed above for women in general. But they tend to be much more vocal about it, because they are the ones who are most directly affected. There is a considerably higher proportion of black women in prison than there are white women in the US... so it is black women who face the risk of having their transgender cellmate rape and impregnate them because the justice system is taking the path of placing gender identity as a feeling above the reality of biological sex. There is a significantly higher rate of rape and domestic violence in black and hispanic communities, and a much higher proportion of women of color make use of domestic violence and rape shelters than do white women.

The thing that all of these people have in common is that we do not hate transgender people at all. We are not "anti-trans". We don't want transgender people harmed or discriminated against. But we're not willing to sacrifice our safety and our rights to provide entitlements to transgender people - entitlements that no other group of people has.

These are all groups of people who have directly faced disadvantage as a result of an innate, immutable characteristic of their lives, one over which they have no control. We can't "identify" out of being female or male. We can't "identify" out of being black or brown or white. We can't "identify" out of being sexually attracted to people of our own sex, or of the opposite sex. And we all understand how vitally important freedom of speech and freedom of belief are to us - because that is the means by which we've been able to make progress in the world. It was the first amendment that allowed the protests, marches, public speeches, rallies, and petitions that got minorities equal civil rights ,that got women the right to vote*, that got acceptance of homosexuality and allowed gay and lesbian couples to get married.

The fantastical apologetics in the above post are worse than I've seen with creationism.
 
Brown and black people are noted to be particularly anti-trans. You then note the brown and black people here who support the baker over the trans person. Many gay people are also anti-trans, you've noted the gay people who support the baker. That's why I wondered if you wanted to go down that road.

I'm going to push back on this. I don't believe that any material number of ethnic minorities or homosexuals, or women for that matter, are "anti-trans". Rather, we're "anti-transgender-ideology".

A not insignificant number of women are completely supportive of transgender people being protected from mistreatment, having equal and fair access to housing, employment, and medical care. But those of us who object to the rhetoric do NOT accept that transgender people are in any way the actual sex that they identify as. Transwomen are not women - they're transgender identified men who wish to live as women. The lobbyist and activist approach to transgender 'rights' has been to replace sex as a protected category in law with 'gender identity', where that gender identity is completely internal and self-declared, with no objective measurement and no requirements of any kind. This has the effect of reducing the rights of women and increasing our risk of harm. It results in male-bodied people competing as women in the Olympics, despite the clear advantages of having a male body. It results in male people, who have been raised and conditioned as men, with all of the advantages of being a man in society being acclaimed as the "highest paid female CEO" or the "funniest female comedian" or being placed on short-lists for "female authors" or taking a position as a "female representative" in politics. It results in male bodied people, with no diagnosis and no medical treatment of any kind, being placed in shared cells with female prisoners. It results in males - with intact genitalia - being granted spaces in female-only rape and domestic violence shelters as a right. These are all things that affect females, but don't affect males. Women end up facing a two-pronged attack on this topic: transgender people who want to encroach on female spaces and support system as an entitlement, and men who are sympathetic to their plight and who do not seem to care about the cost being borne by women.

A fair number of homosexual people oppose transgender ideology, because it erases the entire concept of sexual orientation - something that gay men and lesbians fought long and hard to get acknowledged. Transgender ideology replaces sex with 'gender identity', and then redefines homosexuality to be 'attraction to the same gender identity' rather than to the same sex. This then gets used as to harass and condemn gay and lesbian people who don't want to have sex with transgender people. It has hit lesbians especially hard, where they are told that they have 'vagina fetishes' and are 'transphobes' because they don't want to consider transgender identified men as part of their sexual and romantic pool. They are subject to harassment, threats, and coercion if they don't want to engage in penis-in-vagina sex with 'transbians'. There are entire workshops out there for transgender identified men on how to overcome the "cotton ceiling" so they can work their way into the underwear of lesbians. Publications and organizations that advertise themselves as for the "LGBT" community publish articles with tips for lesbians on how to have sexual interactions with the penises of transwomen. It all comes with a very strong "just try it, you'll like it... you only don't like dick because you haven't tried mine" vibe to it. That's a particular sort of sexual coercion that lesbians have faced for a very long time, and just recently when that pressure was beginning to fade... now it's come back and is being pushed by the very organizations that purport to support lesbians and gay men.

When it comes to ethnicity, I can't speak in generalized terms. I know that at least some of it is a result of religion. But I also know a LOT of black and hispanic women who are extremely opposed to transgender ideology for the reasons listed above for women in general. But they tend to be much more vocal about it, because they are the ones who are most directly affected. There is a considerably higher proportion of black women in prison than there are white women in the US... so it is black women who face the risk of having their transgender cellmate rape and impregnate them because the justice system is taking the path of placing gender identity as a feeling above the reality of biological sex. There is a significantly higher rate of rape and domestic violence in black and hispanic communities, and a much higher proportion of women of color make use of domestic violence and rape shelters than do white women.

The thing that all of these people have in common is that we do not hate transgender people at all. We are not "anti-trans". We don't want transgender people harmed or discriminated against. But we're not willing to sacrifice our safety and our rights to provide entitlements to transgender people - entitlements that no other group of people has.

These are all groups of people who have directly faced disadvantage as a result of an innate, immutable characteristic of their lives, one over which they have no control. We can't "identify" out of being female or male. We can't "identify" out of being black or brown or white. We can't "identify" out of being sexually attracted to people of our own sex, or of the opposite sex. And we all understand how vitally important freedom of speech and freedom of belief are to us - because that is the means by which we've been able to make progress in the world. It was the first amendment that allowed the protests, marches, public speeches, rallies, and petitions that got minorities equal civil rights ,that got women the right to vote*, that got acceptance of homosexuality and allowed gay and lesbian couples to get married.

The fantastical apologetics in the above post are worse than I've seen with creationism.

Would you care to be a bit more specific about what you consider to be "apologetics" that makes it akin to creationism?
 
Back
Top Bottom