Bake that Cake, US Supreme Court.

Bake that Cake, US Supreme Court. This is just questions.

http://morinvillenews.com/2017/12/19/national-column-why-court-needs-to-decide-gay-wedding-case/ just for reference

So the US is about to make a decision on where the moral line is on individual rights vs the rights of a group of individuals. Forget that this fellow is the owner of a business, and as such, it is a company policy, which may split the question further. Consider an employee, working for a bakery, who has a personal issue, but the company policy is to serve all. The employee has the choice; stuff his feelings and moral guidelines down and do the job, or deal with the owners wrath. That is the just doing the job assigned defense. Does an employee have the moral responsibly to not do something he thinks is wrong? So we have seen similar in the past, but the US Supreme court needs to make the decision, is it wrong to not support gay rights. This is to say that religions are right or wrong on this point. If they support gay rights, they say the common christian belief is wrong. If they go the other way, they say that something like 10% of the population has lesser rights than the main population. The US is making moral decisions that are going to plague the US society for a long time.

What would be the decision in Canada? There is little doubt in my mind that the company would need to provide the cake, the decorations are a separate issue, as they are dependent on the skill of the employee making them, so there may be issues there, but the company cannot be discriminatory.

Canada is going through its own similar case with Quebec Face covering. Does the religious requirement have high priority than social safety? We are now into religious values debate vs public standards debate. Are we going to define and enforce national standards of behavior? How are we going to correct the behavior of those who do not meet the public standard of behavior? What about those who are unable to afford those standards? Yes, in this case there are no costs associated, but there are moral costs to changing our opinion of what is right and wrong.

In my opinion, all religions are based on superstitions, so the religious opinions have no value. The gays have rights, regardless of how disgusting I think public displays of gay affection are. Religions  are idiotic or socially retarded, and therefore have no right to create dangerous or stress causing situations. If a person comes into a bank with there face covered, what should the security guard do?

Ultimately, I guess what I am saying is that the religious values has less intrinsic value that the social/humanity based values. Equality of all trumps religious based prejudices, society safety trump religious attire.