Photo shown on Fox News Channel
Photo from Thumbnail on Youtube
Tucker Carlson, the host of Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News, calls out the founder of the Satanic Temple, Lucien Greaves, by saying that he's "a troll" for his belief in Satanism. Carlson then accuses Greaves that he has his Satanic beliefs because of his "unhappy childhood". The Satanic Temple wants Christian bakers to make "cakes for Satan". Carlson claims that the Satanic Temple is forcing the bakers to make their cakes and violating the bakers' beliefs. Lucien replies that religion is a protected class, and sexual orientation isn't one. Greaves uses the example that a gay hairdresser shouldn't have to do a evangelical theocrat's hair that refused to serve him a cake. Greaves claims it's the same scenario as the christian baker refusing to make their cake.
*Click the link to watch the 4 minute video of their conversation*
Questions:
1. Do you think it is okay for Carlson to bash on someone's religion on TV?
2. Is it a violation of one's rights to refuse services because of their beliefs/religion? (the Christian bakers refusing to make the cakes for the Satanic Temple)
3. If you had to make a cake that supports something that you didn't believe in, would you still make it? Why or why not?
13 comments:
I think that Lucien is wrong for forcing Christian bakers to bake cakes for Satan. I don't know how serious Satanism is as a religion but even if it is I do not see why there is issues with a christian baker refusing to bake a "cake for satan". If Satanists are going out of their way to harass Christians then I do not see why they couldn't reject service to these Satanists. Although I probably wouldn't have agreed with Lucien's points every time he was about to make a point Carlson would just interrupt him. I would actually be interested to why Lucien believes Satanism is a credible religion.
Despite how "uncivil" I think Tucker is in his rhetoric, I believe he has a point. Well, if what he says is true. I definitely think that any businesses shouldn't be forced to do anything. Especially if it goes against their religion, since religion tends to cause mass distress. On the topic of Satanism, I really don't care what someone worships, as long as it doesn't hurt me physically. Personally, credibility on pretty much all religions is shaky, so I don't see why Satanism shouldn't be a valid religion.
Even though I strongly disagree with Graves' justifications for harassing Christian bakers, I don't believe that Carlson should denounce his opinions in such a vicious manner. Even if Satanism is a real religion or not, Graves should be allowed to speak whatever he wants to speak and practice any religion or faith he wants to practice since he has the First Amendment rights to do so. However, this does not rationalize Graves' behavior towards this situation. A religious store, or any business in that matter, has the right to refuse service to anyone and this message is even displayed in a couple of small businesses as well. If I were approached by someone who asked me to do something that contrasts my belief, there would be no way that I would do it, no matter what the price may be.
While Satanism has existed long enough to be considered a religion, I still don't agree with the government forcing a baker to make a satanist cake. As owner of a bakery it is ultimately your choice whether to bake a cake that you are religiously opposed to or not. As the government is not the owner of the bakery, it is not its job to tell the bakery to protect people's feelings. Feeling-based laws cannot be objective, because in an example like this someone will get mad. Either the baker or the satanist will complain, and it isn't the governments job to decide who that is.
Yes, criticizing someone's religion is fine, and is a protected right. No, services are not a guaranteed right for others, and one can refuse service to anyone they wish. And yes, that means I'm making more money off that cake.
In reference to the first question, it's one's constitutional right to speak freely, so Carlson does have the right to express his critical opinion. I'm not well-versed on the nature of satanism and whether or not it's classified as a religion, but if it is, then Greaves's argument is fair. A business can refuse service to anyone only if it's not discriminating (on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin, as outlined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964). Therefore, (however outlandish this may seem), if satanism is classified as a valid religion, you could claim that the business should legally serve Greaves. If the religion is provably not credible, then the bakers would have the right to refuse service. If I had to make a cake that supports something I don't believe in, I would still make it as long as it coincides with the law.
While I don't think it's been brought up in the Supreme Court, I'm pretty sure a Christian baker can refuse a Satanist cake or even a gay wedding cake. Denying service to somebody because of what they're asking you to make and not the person themselves seems fair enough under the Civil rights act (feel free to prove me wrong). However, if I was a baker, I wouldn't deny service barring something extreme like a Nazi or Communist cake, because tolerating somebody's opinion isn't too hard especially if you're getting paid.
Although it may not be the best thing to do on television in front of an innumerable amount of people, Carlson does have the constitutional right to criticize another religion. Stores and service occupations do have the right to refuse service(as can seen on the windows/walls of many stores) but I believe the extent of it is rather blurry. The difference between refusing service due to morals and refusing service due to discrimination is hard to distinguish. Lastly, in a business viewpoint, I will be able to maximize profit by making cakes for everyone, disregarding my moral beliefs therefore personally, I probably will still make the cake.
I think that the criticism of someone else's religion is ok, but all within reason, I don't think think that the news reporter should have bashed him so hard. still though, he does have the first amendment right to do this, and say the things that he did about satanism, and stores do have the right to refuse service as they choose. In my opinion it is understandable that people would refuse to make cakes for something they are strongly opposed to. I do not think that their refusal to make cakes is too much of any discrimination though, they are just standing up for what they believe, and i am sure that there are many other bakeries that would make the satanists cake. Personally though, if I was in their position I would probably still make the cake, because I believe that while it wouldn't be something I don't believe in, it is not that big of a deal, and it is really just business and I would put my morals aside just to do my job.
While I think it is inappropriate and uncalled for to criticize someone's religion on T.V., Carlson is allowed to speak freely and share his opinion under the first amendment. Store and service jobs are allowed to refuse to serve someone, however, I think that it is morally wrong when it has to do with people's religions and beliefs. Everyone has the right to an opinion and everyone's opinions matters, even if some may disagree with them. Also, the ability to refuse service to someone is not allowed to be based on race, color or sex. I agree with Hannah in that if that is considered a religion, then it is against the law to not serve Greaves. Additionally, I think that I would still make the cake even if it was supporting something that I did not believe in because from a business perspective, I would still benefit. Morally, I think that I would think about making the cake as it is supporting something I am against, however, in the end I would make it because it will probably make a small or very minimal impact on my life.
I think that Carlson did have the right to say what he thought about Greaves beliefs. I do think that, because he was on TV in front of a wide audience, he could have been more professional but I guess that drama is what gets people to watch the show. As Hannah said, if Satanism is considered a religion the bakery probably should not refuse them service but it is understandable that they would not want to support something that offends them. Personally I do not think that my ideas about someone else's beliefs should get in the way of doing my job. I would probably make the cake for them unless I somehow knew it was for an event that would cause harm to people.
Post a Comment