This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It is an odd case, given the claims here, and the fact that it's in Colorado just makes it murkier.
Were I a Christian businessowner in Colorado planning to get into the wedding business for whatever slice of the action (cakes, flowers, wedding planner) I'd be very cautious about "will a lawsuit come down the pike if I don't serve LGBT customers?" because those have already happened and been decided in Colorado. The trans case against the baker who eventually won his case seems to be on the part of a Colorado lawyer called Autumn Scardina who is taking the case due to being trans themselves (and who knows, it probably doesn't hurt to get their name out there as LGBT friendly law firm) and is dragging on forever and, my own personal take on it, Scardina is hounding the guy because they do want to drive him out of business because he's not pro-LGBT. I've read so many articles on this I can't remember where I read it, but I think I read that Scardina said part of the reason for asking for the trans cake was in order to bring the case because they hated the anti-gay decision about the wedding cake.
So 303 Creative taking a case makes sense in that environment. But what happened? Did she want to take a case about "suppose someone asks me to design for a gay wedding and I refuse", and was told "they won't decide on that" and she, or her lawyer, or somebody else, then invented or put in a fake claim that a gay guy asked her to do this?
Did somebody really ask her to do it but it wasn't Stewart Nolastname, it was somebody else using his name?
Is somebody trying to get her into trouble - like Scardina with the bakery - but then six years before springing "Aha! There is no gay threat!" seems like an awfully long time to wait?
Did Stewart Nolastname really do it, because he was setting up a CNN exposé story? Again, though, six years is an awfully long time to wait before doing the Hour Long Special.
I have no idea what to think here, and we badly need fresh and accurate information.
More options
Context Copy link