San Juan Mountains

San Juan Mountains
San Juan Mountains: Grenadier Range

Monday, July 13, 2015

Cake And Whiskey

I joke about how, when I need to lose weight, I like to utilize the cake and whiskey diet.  There is no better way to lose weight than embarking upon a concerted program of cake eating and whiskey drinking.  But that is not the point of today's blog post.  Today I would like to write about the relationship of cake and whiskey to the government of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.  You might think that the government has little to nothing to say about cake and whiskey but you would be wrong.  Cake and whiskey are two of the most significant commodities in the country in the eyes of career politicians, career bureaucrats and the jack-booted thugs who enforce the laws of this immoral land.  Allow me to explain.
Do you ever remember seeing a sign in a storefront announcing that "We Reserve The Right To Refuse Service To Anyone"?  I think those signs came on the scene during the hippie era of the 1960s.  Hippies, as a group, were dirty, filthy and smelly.  They rarely cleaned their bodies and the things they ingested only added to their stench.  Since hippies also sauntered about without shirts and shoes it was not long before profit seeking businesses put signs up on their doors declaring that "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service."  What was a hippie to do?  So he put on a shirt and some flip-flops and entered the store.  Not long after that the aforementioned signs appeared.  Proprietors had to do something to protect themselves from those walking stink bombs that would drive away legitimate business.  Interestingly enough, nobody ever complained about the content of the sign which clearly announced that a business owner could choose who to do business with.
Fast forward to today and things have changed dramatically.  The doctrine we have all been forced to adopt today asserts that any profit seeking business is required by law to serve anyone who approaches it.  The mere fact that a businessman has offered one of his goods to a public customer binds him in perpetuity, according to this interpretation of the law of the SDA, to serve anyone who enters his store.  Historically this is most likely the result of the civil rights movement.  The incorrectly named civil rights movement forced white business owners to serve black people.  I note that the civil rights movement is incorrectly named because the only people who were granted special rights by the government were black people.  I continue to experience racial discrimination at the hands of the Scots and the Irish.  One of what I am sure would become a favorite Celtic pub of mine has a sign on the door saying, "No Welshmen Allowed."  The civil rights movement did not force the drunken Irishman who owns that store to serve me.  So much for equality.
Forcing white people to sell things to black people or forcing shiftless Scots to sell things to the Welsh is a violation of the sacred right to refuse serve to anyone.  The entire notion that coercion can be used in a free market transaction is odious to freedom lovers.  Nobody should ever be forced to sell or do anything for anyone in the free market.  Everyone should be free to discriminate as he pleases.  Why is this so?  Because of the right of private property and the right of free association.  In theory the Constitution recognizes my right to my property and my right to association with whomever I wish.  That also means that I have a right to do whatever I want with my property and not associate with anyone that bugs me.  I should be free to sell my widgets to one person and not another simply because they are my widgets and I can do with them what I please.  But then the omniscient and beneficent federal government of the SDA arrives on the scene and makes the declaration from on high that any customer to whom it has granted most high and holy status must be served by all plebeians like me.  In doing so the god-like government has just proclaimed that my property really does not belong to me because this sanctified customer has a moral claim on what I own.  My right to private property is destroyed and so is my right to free association.
What does any of this have to do with cake and whiskey?  Everything!  If I am a proprietor of cakes the cakes that I bake belong to me until I sell them to a customer in the free market who is willing to pay the price I am asking.  When a lesbian couple enters my store and demands that I bake them a cake I no longer have the right of ownership of my cake nor do I any longer have the right to associate with whomever I wish.  That lesbian couple has been granted special coercive rights by the god-like government and my job is to fear them.  I must kiss their rings, bake their cake and sell it to them for a reduced price just to keep from being accused of jacking up the price to punish them because I am a homophobic.  Failure to comply with the demands of the lesbians will result in financial punishments and possibly prison.
On the other hand, if I am a proprietor of whiskey and a drunken Irishman walks into my bar and demands a drink, I can be fined and possibly imprisoned by the SDA government if I do serve him what he wants.  If I give the Irish slob a shot of fine Welsh whiskey and then he drives away and ends up killing somebody I can be arrested as an accomplice to murder according to the God-hating laws of this immoral country.  In the case of a cake I have no right of ownership of what I have produced but in the case of whiskey I am held responsible for not only my right of ownership of the whiskey but how my customers might use it after I sell it to them.  My right of ownership of the whiskey is imputed to the patron who drinks it. 
So what is the point of all this ranting?  It should be obvious to anyone with eyes to see that the issue is not about being required to serve anyone who enters a profit seeking business desiring to make a purchase.  The argument has been framed by the special interest groups who have obtained the privilege of government coercion for themselves in such a way as to hide what is really going on.  Lesbians demanding cakes and drunks demanding drinks is not about the moral necessity for profit seeking businesses to serve the public without discriminating.  Lesbians demanding cakes and drunks demanding drinks is all about special interest groups being granted special coercive powers by the federal government which allow them to force profit seeking businesses to do things they would not ordinarily do.  Anti-discrimination laws have nothing to do with preventing immoral discrimination and everything with using the power of government to create winners and losers in the free market.  The odds are pretty good that if you are a Christian businessman you are one of the losers.  You will be forced to pay for murderous birth control devices for your female employees and you will be forced to take photographs at a gay wedding and, if you are a Christian minister, you will soon be forced to perform the ceremony celebrating debauchery.
If you go to a gay wedding you will probably notice a large percentage of the cars in the parking lot sporting the bumper sticker that exhorts us to "CoExist."  That, of course, is a lie.  God's law and man's law cannot coexist.  They hate each other.  And, in the SDA, the law of man has won the war.  The law of God is right out.

No comments:

Post a Comment