Remembering the Cake

in politics •  6 years ago 

It's been years now since "the scandal" but I remember vividly how much people discussed it. Yes, How could someone bake a cake for a gay couple, when doing so was against their faith? That for some reason or another became the biggest problem we needed to solve as a society, and of course the story is still unfolding today in one way or another.

To me, it boils down to one thing: Freedom. There's little more to discuss here besides that. The Baker has the right to not serve someone if he so chooses, it's his business. That being said, making these choices does not exempt him from being a bigot, an asshole, or the opposite a good person. Truth is that we love to politicize everything, and our politicians love using these things to their advantage.

The ones in the wrong to me will always be the ones that impose themselves on others. I may love listening to hip hop at 2 am, full blast, that's not a problem. The problem is that my neighbors have to listen to it too, and there is where my freedom ends, simple as that.

Yesterday we learnt that Facebook has banned a bunch of right wing accounts from their platform. The same people who sided, and rightfully so, with the baker's right to refuse service to whoever he chooses to, are now demanding that Facebook recant their decision, key word here being demanding, and they don't see the problem with this line of thinking.

Now, I know what some people will say. It's about discrimination. Yes, I agree that's important. The idea that we create a system that is not conducive to discrimination. But where do we draw the line? I mean, I could say that I was discriminated against, because they made me turn down my music at 2 am, and it was my right to listen to music I like, when I want to. Do you see where I'm going with this?

To believe that what we need is more laws, more overseers, more bureaucracy is to miss the mark all together. Do you want social media to be "the public square", then social media needs to be public, while it's not, then it's a private enterprise and as such it can make choices, like any business can.

What does a public social media look like? Well, the answer is in front of our very eyes: Decentralize social media, that simple. Then this whole talk about discrimination, silencing the right, the left, etc, goes completely out the door and becomes one hundred percent irrelevant.

I know it's a cliche these days, but it's a mantra to me: Wake the f... up!

MenO

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Last point I just thought of...if the baker who owns the business has a right to choose his customers, does a social media company, owned by shareholders not have the right to run choose their customers?
Not saying whats right or wrong, just putting the question out there and wondering if there are some double standards at play!

Decentralization woth privacy of user and good interfaces of dapp is the next generation of social media.

Posted using Partiko Android

There will be no stopping it until the public wakes up to decentralization as an option. I think we are still far from it though unfortunately as the media will not allow it to florish.

Posted using Partiko iOS

Yeah, I can't believe what people are putting up with.

Trying to silence people makes me angry, cake, bigotry is ugly, but it is out there silencing it doesn't change it, silencing it just takes it underground

Do away with religion, embrace humanitarian ideology, problem solved and it is humanitarian principles on which you touched upon, the basic mantra being that everyone has the freedom to do what they want with the provision that it does not negatively effect another persons right to that same freedom.
The baker attempted to impose his freedom to allow himself to be governed by religion on the gay guy wanting to buy a cake. His actions are discriminatory and beyond disgust.
Sadly we need laws because humankind has not evolved enough to accept that all humans have an equal right to life whatever their 'ism' .

This particular issue wasn't about freedom, it was about one persons belief system opposing another persons belief system, one persons freedom being more important and freer than anothers. That's worse than law.

The line needs to be drawn using humanitarianism.

As for your music, if you lived next door to me and played hip hop at 2am at top volume, I would simply play the 1812 overture at top volume at 6am.....Youd also be pissed off and to deal with this situation, youd stop pissing me off at 2am, to make me stop pissing you off at 6am....equilibrium would be restored. Life is about balance :-)

Sadly while there are more bigoted religious fuckwits than humanists, the world will stay fucked until the numbers even out and the balance is restored....

Hope the new chapter in your life is treating you kindly young fella :-)

Excellent review @meno and it seems to me that freedom in social networks will never be complete freedom, because there will always be those who want to limit this freedom, such is life!

Hi @meno!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 5.951 which ranks you at #358 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 4 places in the last three days (old rank 362).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 319 contributions, your post is ranked at #30.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • You've built up a nice network.
  • The readers appreciate your great work!
  • Good user engagement!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server