It is my contention that conservatives have failed in the information war when it comes to the issue of the rights of conscience — and “dissent.” A few of my favorite articles on this topic were written by Matt Barber. The one titled “An Absolute Right to Refuse Service” is a must-read. Another one is “Bake Your Own Damn Cake.”
The above titled article is by David French at the National Review, and here is his opening:
If fashion designers can refuse service to the Trumps based on principle, why can’t bakers and florists follow their own principles?
There’s nothing quite like a change of power to expose hypocrisy. Yesterday, the Washington Post ran a long and flattering discussion of fashion designers who are just in anguish that their artistic talents could be abused in the service of a cause they despise. In other words, they don’t want to “dress” Melania or Ivanka Trump.
In an open letter rejecting the idea of working with the Trumps, designer Sophie Theallet said, “We value our artistic freedom, and always humbly seek to contribute to a more humane, conscious, and ethical way to create in this world.” She said, “As an independent fashion brand, we consider our voice an expression of our artistic and philosophical ideas.”
. . .
The designers aren’t refusing to dress the Trumps because of their gender but because of their presumed worldview. Similarly, when a baker or florist works with gay men and women all the time and just draws the line when they’re asked to help celebrate a same-sex wedding, they’re objecting to a particular idea, not refusing service based on status. If a black baker refuses to bake a Confederate-flag cake, is he refusing because of the race of the customer or the symbolism of the flag?
. . .
Where’s the same concern for the small-town florist or baker? No, those people need to be crushed — to be fined and driven out of business until they conform to the cultural elite. They need to be ruined and reeducated. “Free speech for me but not for thee” is forever the cry of the powerful, and now it’s supplemented with a form a sneering condescension against those who disagree – especially if they disagree on religious grounds.
Read more at: National Review
Image credit: Debby Wong / Shutterstock, Inc.