Thursday, January 9, 2014

Freedom, capitalism and the LGBTQ

The arguments raging about whether refusing personal services to gay and lesbian couples getting married have always focused on the couples' 1st amendment rights rather than the rights of the individual business owner. I've always questioned whether the 1st amendment actually guarantees the right to a wedding cake, flowers and photography; but there is a definite Constitutional argument for the business owners' 13th Amendment rights.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."


There it is, folks. Involuntary servitude. Being forced to perform a personal service or labor against one's will under threat of punishment, and without having been convicted of a crime (labor in prison or picking up trash on the highway). These business people have done nothing wrong other than assert their own right to refuse to labor for someone. 

I have nothing against gays and lesbians as a whole, I think the radical politicized LGBTQ's need to get a different hobby. They can have their ceremonies with cakes, flowers and photography without forcing someone to labor against their will. There are so many operators out there who would gladly take their money, there is no reason to bully someone into performing a service just to "validate" their choices. Pick one and shut up. 

The author of the below article sets the argument up perfectly and offers some really good solutions to those facing government sanctioned involuntary servitude. 
at

5 comments:

  1. VolframJanuary 9, 2014 at 2:54 PM

    Watch them suddenly remember this the moment a gay cake maker refuses to make a wedding cake for a straight couple.

    ReplyDelete
  2. LeighJanuary 10, 2014 at 2:33 AM

    "..., except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,..."

    You see, Darlin', they HAVE convicted you - of thought crime. Besides, not being a protected voting block, we don't have any rights; only they are entitled to their "rights".

    I also agree with Volfram. However - you would never hear about it in the LSM. Therefore, it will not have technically have happened. All courtesy of the Ministry of Truth.

    Leigh
    Whitehall, NY

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousJanuary 10, 2014 at 5:30 AM

    I agree. That bakery in Colorado that was ordered to bake the cake for the gay wedding was clearly over the top for 'coercion'. Are there other bakeries in Colorado - yes. Did their initial refusal to not bake the cake stop the wedding - nope, in fact they would have lost a sale.

    What busted him was saying why they refused to make the cake. They should of just went with 'We're totally booked that week - can do' or other excuse. Instead, they told the truth and now have a legal bill to pay - sheesh.

    I remember when 'No shoes, no shirt, no service' were a rule. Now I'll bet if they were homosexual or other minority, some dumb ass lawyer would challenge that as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. JeremyRJanuary 11, 2014 at 8:16 AM

    I'd say bake em a chocolate cake that really tastes like shit, but you know the perverts would enjoy it.
    What ever happened to We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  5. HeisenbugJanuary 11, 2014 at 4:33 PM

    @JeremyR the Civil Rights Act wiped out the right to refuse service, and that's why Goldwater nearly voted against it.

    As for the GLBTQWhateverTheFuck lobby... one of their own has refused to take part in their games, saying that they've become the bullies they always claimed to be standing up to. He was right.

    ReplyDelete

Play nice. None of you are too old for a spanking.