Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
pcf

Egg Farm refuses to sell to Christians for Easter.

68 posts in this topic

In Dearborn, MI, Yusef's Egg Farm refuses to sell eggs to be used as Easter eggs. As a devout Muslim, Yusef could sell eggs for cakes, scrambling, overeasy, sunny side up, or throwing at cars, but not for use in Easter rituals.

 

"Some Christians came in and wanted some eggs to dye. I just can't sell for activities that conflict with my religion. I feel the Easter bunny and the Easter egg hunt is designed to convert our children into Christians. Don't you want to hunt for eggs from a giant bunny? Then they've got you as a Christian!"

 

Unfortunately, the ACLU got involved. Yusef could lose his farm and he's put all his eggs in that one basket, but he thinks it is worth it. "My religious beliefs are more important than my farm." 

 

His rival, Bob's Egg Farm, located in Flint, understands Yusef. Bob sells special Easter eggs from sanctified hens. Bob says, "I would pitch a fit if someone was using my eggs in some preverted(sic) way. I don't care for all the different types of people nowadays. I like old fashioned America where we didn't have to think about how people are using our eggs."

www.pcfnews.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that he wants (and should be able to) stick to the tenets of his religion.  And I'm cool with that.

 

 

 

 

But since when is the Easter Bunny or Easter eggs a religious rite?  Pretty secular if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that he wants (and should be able to) stick to the tenets of his religion.  And I'm cool with that.

 

 

 

 

But since when is the Easter Bunny or Easter eggs a religious rite?  Pretty secular if you ask me.

 

Imagine Yusef's dilemma. People often have ham for Easter, then they take the leftovers and make ham and eggs. Is Yusef able to police the use of his eggs sufficiently to suit his conscience? 

 

Does anyone get to extend their conscience very far? I think we make many compromises when we partake in public marketplaces and a broader economy. Are his products or the cash he receives from them perpetually free from complicating matters of conscience? Perhaps it is a little ridiculous to want to dictate personal values through the marketplace to a perfect standard.

 

Yusef could be feeding a murderer with his eggs while obsessing over Easter eggs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're his eggs.  He should be able to sell them or not to whomever he wishes.  I'm very tired of government interference in private affairs.  And knowing his beliefs, people are free to avoid buying his eggs.  I'd go far out of my way to avoid his eggs, which is my right as a free American.  Let the market work and keep the government and the courts out of it.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're his eggs.  He should be able to sell them or not to whomever he wishes.  I'm very tired of government interference in private affairs.  And knowing his beliefs, people are free to avoid buying his eggs.  I'd go far out of my way to avoid his eggs, which is my right as a free American.  Let the market work and keep the government and the courts out of it.   

 

Should companies be allowed to discriminate against Christians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should companies be allowed to discriminate against Christians?

Yes. And decent people will avoid such companies and their policies will change in the pursuit of profit. I believe in freedom. Our nation was founded on freedom, not on the concept of government busybodies bossing people around. Actually, the intervention of government busybodies is almost always harmful. If someone insults me or others, I can choose not to do business with him. That is his loss. I don't need some sociology school dropout getting involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. And decent people will avoid such companies and their policies will change in the pursuit of profit. I believe in freedom. Our nation was founded on freedom, not on the concept of government busybodies bossing people around. Actually, the intervention of government busybodies is almost always harmful. If someone insults me or others, I can choose not to do business with him. That is his loss. I don't need some sociology school dropout getting involved.

 

So it would be justice if Yusef was put out of business? Or would it be religious persecution of him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it would be justice if Yusef was put out of business? Or would it be religious persecution of him?

 

It would be people exercising their free will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'm pretty sure pcf is making up this example, "people exercising their free will" includes a lot of slave owners and dictators.

 

The difference is the use or threat of violence. In theory, a business owner should be able to refuse customers, who can then take their money elsewhere and it's the business owner's loss. But back in the bad old days, if a restaurant served black customers and white customers together, he would find his restaurant burned down some night. And it was likely the sheriff who did it. I don't think discrimination is necessarily evil, the enforcement of it with violence is.

 

In the original example, customers can buy Easter eggs elsewhere, so no harm is really done. But if the ACLU and legal authorities but Yusef in jail, he is greatly harmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is the use or threat of violence. In theory, a business owner should be able to refuse customers, who can then take their money elsewhere and it's the business owner's loss. But back in the bad old days, if a restaurant served black customers and white customers together, he would find his restaurant burned down some night. And it was likely the sheriff who did it. I don't think discrimination is necessarily evil, the enforcement of it with violence is.

 

In the original example, customers can buy Easter eggs elsewhere, so no harm is really done. But if the ACLU and legal authorities but Yusef in jail, he is greatly harmed.

 

Does the denied customer have the right to bring legal action according to the laws of the land? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are the limits on who gets to exercise free will and when? 

 

Not much limit beyond the obvious.  No violence, including to yourself.  No property damage.  No interfering with the free exercise of commerce.  (You have the right to boycott and even picket in an orderly manner.  You don't have the right to block access to a business.)  And the example of segregation is an example of government busybodies passing and enforcing laws telling business owners who they were allowed to have as customers and how they were allowed to seat them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much limit beyond the obvious.  No violence, including to yourself.  No property damage.  No interfering with the free exercise of commerce.  (You have the right to boycott and even picket in an orderly manner.  You don't have the right to block access to a business.)  And the example of segregation is an example of government busybodies passing and enforcing laws telling business owners who they were allowed to have as customers and how they were allowed to seat them. 

 

So the society has no rights to set limits and standards in commerce so that everyone is free to operate as a full member of society? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should companies be allowed to discriminate against Christians?

 

Change eggs to hotels or lunch counters and change Christians to blacks ... Still want to ask the question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change eggs to hotels or lunch counters and change Christians to blacks ... Still want to ask the question?

 

 I actually switched a real story to eggs. A gay couple were denied a wedding cake by a bakery. The baker said he would sell them anything but a wedding cake. 

 

I think the baker was wrong and silly, but I'm not sure it rises to the level where society is served by battling it in the legal process. OTOH, I'm not sure that civil rights don't erode if you don't protect them.

 

I don't care about one baker and no one else does either. What I don't like is the idea that people in public can act on a whim and not a public standard. I don't like the idea of a restaurant not using the highest sanitation standards. I don't want the kitchen staff using different standards for different people. 

 

We don't have the absolute right to go into business in many many fields. It is a privilege and it is regulated. 

 

I am divided between what I consider trivial and what would be a serious precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the government should force anyone to do business with anyone they don't want to. The market with punish the stupidity of discrimination without the threat of violent enforcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the government should force anyone to do business with anyone they don't want to. The market with punish the stupidity of discrimination without the threat of violent enforcement.

 

Does the market mechanism address protecting individuals from abusive behaviors? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do the rights of the customer end and the rights of the business owner begin? Yusef is not discriminating against Christians, he will sell them eggs for any number of uses. But he declines to have his product used for an event of which he does not approve. Just as the bakers said they would be glad to sell birthday cakes to homosexuals, but do not want to be participants in homosexual weddings.

 

Should the law require a Black-owned business to sell cross-making materials to the KKK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do the rights of the customer end and the rights of the business owner begin? Yusef is not discriminating against Christians, he will sell them eggs for any number of uses. But he declines to have his product used for an event of which he does not approve. Just as the bakers said they would be glad to sell birthday cakes to homosexuals, but do not want to be participants in homosexual weddings.

 

Should the law require a Black-owned business to sell cross-making materials to the KKK?

Lumber and gasoline/oil?  Probably yes. But of course there is nothing to prevent said business to then inform the FBI in the law either. Same with fertilizer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the triviality of some of this stuff is incredible. Do I think refusing to make a cake is a serious breach of civil rights? No, I don't. Do I think it is a ridiculous and useless stand on the part of the baker? Absolutely. He's not going to stop gay marriage. The people can buy a cake elsewhere.

 

Look at the outcome for the aggrieved party if either loses. Gay couple have to buy a cake elsewhere or the baker sells a cake for a profit. I think society should arrest them all for public nuisance. 

 

Go F' Yusef...

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the triviality of some of this stuff is incredible. Do I think refusing to make a cake is a serious breach of civil rights? No, I don't. Do I think it is a ridiculous and useless stand on the part of the baker? Absolutely. He's not going to stop gay marriage. The people can buy a cake elsewhere.

 

Look at the outcome for the aggrieved party if either loses. Gay couple have to buy a cake elsewhere or the baker sells a cake for a profit. I think society should arrest them all for public nuisance. 

 

:P

 

Well for the business owner, it's about choosing for whom you wish to work.  I'm not saying it's not a stupid decision to refuse service, but I am saying that I don't think the law should get involved.  Let people decide freely with whom they choose to do business.  Business transactions should be free from government coercion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for the business owner, it's about choosing for whom you wish to work.  I'm not saying it's not a stupid decision to refuse service, but I am saying that I don't think the law should get involved.  Let people decide freely with whom they choose to do business.  Business transactions should be free from government coercion.  

 

I think there need to be standards for society that we agree to in public and that people need some coersion to have a decent society. It doesn't make sense to me to strive for a government that treats everyone equally under the law and that doesn't discriminate so that people can face private discrimination and create societal discord.

 

Is freedom more important than a healthy society? Are message board trolls more important than the message board?

 

Conservatives have always believed in coersion historically. They quit believing in it when it could be used against them to do things they didn't want to do. 

 

If we had this free society, why can't people buy what they want and come and go as they want? Why are there immigration laws instead of the natural marketplace to set population levels?

 

There's a balance there can cannot be found on one side or the other. The business owner needs freedom, but he also has a responsibility if he enters the market square, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.