Jeb Bush LGBT

Jeb Bush “Absolutely” Believes in Discrimination

JM Ashby
Written by JM Ashby

During an interview with Christian Broadcast News, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that he, without a doubt, believes that businesses should be allowed to discriminate for religious reasons.

“Are you okay if they don’t provide those kinds of services? Is that okay?”

Yeah, absolutely,” Bush responded, “if it’s based on a religious belief.” [...]

“A big country — a tolerant country — ought to be able to figure out the difference between discriminating against someone because of their sexual orientation and forcing someone to participate in a wedding that they find goes against their moral beliefs. We should be able to figure this out. This shouldn’t be this complicated, but gosh it is right now.

Gosh!

For all intents and purposes, there is no difference between discrimination against someone for one reason or another, and Jeb's premise is flawed.

No one, anywhere, is proposing that anyone should be forced to "participate in a wedding." No one is going to force clergy to officiate gay weddings, and baking a cake is not participation. It's just a goddamn cake.

Would Jeb Bush "absolutely" support racism based on religious belief?

KKKreligion

  • Christopher Foxx

    …and forcing someone to participate in a wedding that they find goes against their moral beliefs.

    Oh, for fuck’s sake. Baking a cake or delivering flowers isn’t participating in the wedding.

    The groom, the bride, the officiant and the attendants participate. That’s it. Even the guests are merely observers.

    The caterer? Not a participant.

    • Groundloop

      “No more than the person who sells flour to the baker.”

      How far back in the supply chain is this ridiculousness supposed to go? Is it just to protect the religious freedom of the baker (retailer)? But what about the miller? The wheat and egg farmers? How about the dairy? The reductio ad absurdum practically writes itself. Won’t someone think of the religious freedom of the company that makes a gasket that goes into the pump that puts air in the tires of the trucks that move all this product around?

      • Christopher Foxx

        Exactly.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    My latest on Daily Kos which is sort of going semi-viral, about how the GOP and its color-war team confuse power with liberty, and the loss of the former with the loss of the latter.

    What Jebya is basically saying is that in a “tolerant” country, “religious” people should be allowed to exert power over others in accordance with their “beliefs.” Refusing to provide goods and services that are freely offered to the public (i.e., on the “free market”) to one particular customer because of the color of his skin, or the gender to which she is attracted, is an exercise of both economic and political power, viz., the power to decide who does and does not have the right to participate in retail commerce on the same terms as everyone else.

    • Christopher Foxx

      All these complaints have one thing in common: They have nothing to do with, and do not reflect any actual loss of, “liberty” or “freedom.” They are, rather, complaints about the loss of POWER. Whether it’s speech, religion or economics, the GOP’s cultural color-war team is losing power, not “freedom,” and either can’t tell the difference or is deliberately conflating the two in order to maintain and/or restore the former.

      Oh, but they are the same thing. The loss of power means the Republicans no longer have as much freedom to impose their will on others.

      • GrafZeppelin127

        Right, but the point is, the “[so-called] freedom to impose [one’s] will on others” is not liberty; it’s power. The powerful don’t know the difference.

        • Christopher Foxx

          Exactly.

          I’d say it’s like they believe there is only a fixed amount of freedom available. So more for someone else means less for them.

          But I’m convinced it’s more just (similar to what you say) that they want power. Not just power to do what they want (i.e. “freedom to do what they want”). But specifically the power to control the lives of others.

  • muselet

    And once again we have a Righty demanding that decent people tolerate his intolerance. I can only speak for myself, but no, thank you, Mr Bush.

    This shouldn’t be this complicated, but gosh it is right now.

    It’s not actually complicated. Refusing to provide goods or services to someone because of who s/he is (goods or services which would be provided to others) is discrimination Discrimination is wrong and shouldn’t be countenanced in a decent society.

    That Jeb was advertised as the smart Bush brother says a lot about both George W Bush and the way political insiders grade on a curve.

    –alopecia

  • Toolymegapoopoo

    Thank you Indiana for making this silly topic something each of the clowns in the GOP field will be required to weigh in on. Moderate conservatives and even some hard core right-wingers think these religious discrimination laws are moronic. Only the rabid base sees a need for them. Watching Jeb squirm his way through this issue is great fun.