Kenn's Laws | | REAL Black History | Kenn's Essays | History & Archaeology | Weather

Why Racism is Wrong | Why White Supremacy is Wrong | Why Antisemitism Is Wrong

MUST READ ► My Horrific Experience With A Psychopath

September 5, 2013

A New Jersey father lost his children to social services after requesting a local grocery provide a birthday cake with his son's name on it. The grocer refused to make the cake. The dad got himself into trouble with authorities.

In Indianapolis it was the baker who got himself in trouble for refusing to bake cookies.

What's up with the criminal baking? And why the reversal?
Adolf Hitler with his parents

The man in New Jersey, Heath Campbell, was cited by local authorities after the grocer reported him. Campbell named his son Adolph Hitler. The grocer, who apparently found that name offensive, refused to make the cake. [source]

The baker in Indianapolis was also offended when a local group requested he provide rainbow cookies for a gay 'coming out' celebration. He refused to make the cookies. [source]

The New Jersey grocer was pardoned by public opinion. The Indianapolis baker was skewered by local authorities and took heat in the local media. No one accused the grocer of discriminating against Nazis. The Christian baker, however, was investigated for discrimination.

There seems to be a double standard that follows a rule of law that is based on prevailing political correctness. Therein lies the problem.

The grocer's refusal to serve Nazis is not considered hate. The baker's refusal to serve gays is considered hate. Therefore the law against discrimination discriminates against Nazis and Christians but not gays.

That raises serious questions.

Who gets to decide what is and is not hate? Why are the Nazis' convictions disrespected while the gays' convictions are respected? Who gets to decide what is and is not a respectable conviction?

If government follows a social mandate against discrimination for one group, why would it not apply that mandate to all groups?

If government requires Christians to make cakes and cookies for gays, shouldn't gays also be required to make them for Nazis?

The Christians had their turn to discriminate against gays and Nazis. Now the gays get their turn to discriminate. When will the Nazis get a turn?

Who gave the government the authority to tell me that I may or may not discriminate against Christians, gays, or Nazis?

My opinion, as you may have guessed, runs the traditional libertarian line: Bakers and grocers should have the right of free association, to bake and make products for whomever they wish and to decline any customer for any reason.

Here's why:

• Discrimination is unavoidable because it necessarily flows two ways. Authorities in Indianapolis discriminated against the cookie baker's religious convictions for discriminating against gays' political convictions. Authorities in New Jersey did not discriminate against the grocer's political convictions and thereby did discriminate against the Nazis' political convictions.

• Our nation has experienced a cultural shift that has affected civil rights laws. It's a classic example of the folly of laws that tamper with our right of free association. In recent years the gay lifestyle was almost universally considered immoral and, in many jurisdictions, illegal. Today it is the Christian lifestyle that is commonly considered immoral and often illegal.

There is a pattern: Christians are being treated like Nazis because it's the gays' "turn". An article published by the Patriot Update reveals the anti-Christian discrimination is becoming more common.
- Sweet Cakes By Melissa – This family-owned bakery, run by Christians, just went out of business, all because they declined making a wedding cake for a gay couple. The lesbian couple filed discrimination and the LGBT community boycotted the company and threatened other companies to keep them from doing business with Sweet Cakes. The owner claims LGBT boycotters made threats to her family and children, as well. 
- Who can forget the Christian photographers that the New Mexico Supreme Court decided “violated the state’s Human Right’s Act” by not shooting a gay wedding? 
- A florist in Washington faced his second lawsuit, in April, for refusing to cater gay weddings.  
- Jack Phillips is a baker in Denver who wouldn’t bake a gay wedding cake. He is facing possible jail time. 
- A T-shirt company in Lexington is caught in a Human Rights Commission Investigation for, of course, not making T-shirts for a gay organization. 
- In Canada, a Bed & Breakfast refusing to allow a gay couple to stay, was fined $4500.
What happens if a gay Christian Nazi wants to order cookies?

Please report errors
Like this story?
Help Kenn spread the word by clicking it onto Facebook. See icon below . . .

Permission is granted to use the material in this article providing (1) the byline is included in an obvious manner crediting as the author, (2) a link to this page is included and (3) no changes are made either by deletion, addition or annotation. Original compositions at are sometimes seeded with decoy data, such as hidden acronyms, to detect unauthorized use and plagiarism.

COMMENTS: The use of vulgarities and pejoratives may result in your comment being zapped.


Post a Comment