*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[OngBonga]

Well... setting aside that the cake maker absolutely does choose their occupation...

So does the songwriter. Just because he's good at writing songs, doesn't mean it's the only thing he can do.

I find such behavior despicable

I agree, but this isn't the point. I'm not seeking to justify discrimination against gays, but at the same time I don't want to see artists being compelled to do things they don't want to do.

IDK about the internet. It's a fuzzy line if there is one. It's probably all gray area, really, and I simply don't know enough about it, or have the legal backing to make a sweeping statement. If you have some specific cases to ponder over, I'll give them a think.

For me, the physical store and the internet store should be subject to the same laws and regulations. Ok the internet store doesn't have to worry about the health and safety of customers in their store, to give one example of a natural difference, but there's no reason the internet seller should have more right to choose his customers than the physical store.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I agree, but this isn't the point. I'm not seeking to justify discrimination against gays, but at the same time I don't want to see artists being compelled to do things they don't want to do.

I'm totally with you there... except that we're both being a little disingenuous.

If you are witness to a crime, you are compelled to truthfully report what you witnessed to the authorities, though you may not wish to do so.
I.e. there are times when the law compels certain speech.
The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to testify against yourself, but now I'm just noting exceptions to exceptions.

More to the point, I don't see how selling someone anything that happens to be used in a gay wedding somehow means the supply chain of resources that got that item to that point is endorsing gay marriage. The cake maker is claiming that by selling someone a cake, they are being "forced" to endorse gay marriage. I do not see how that is true.

I mean... what if the flour mills decided they wouldn't sell flour to anyone who makes gay cakes - or anyone who buys their flour and then sells it to someone who makes cakes? Is that still their artistic choice? Isn't the specific production method of flour they use an art form of its own? What are the limits of this art claim?

What about the chicken that laid the eggs? That hen never got any cock. What if it was a lesbian chicken? Is the baker already complicit in supporting the gay chicken cabal?!

For me, the physical store and the internet store should be subject to the same laws and regulations. Ok the internet store doesn't have to worry about the health and safety of customers in their store, to give one example of a natural difference, but there's no reason the internet seller should have more right to choose his customers than the physical store.

I'd probably consider ebay or amazon to be more public-type internet places, but they do require a private membership sign up to use, and therefore fall into my category of private club and free to choose their clientele.

It's all kinds of fuzzy on the internet.