Penis Cake?

Posted on Updated on

Inner Dialogue Voice 1: Are you really going to put your readers through 900 words of a homophobic alarmist rant before getting to the punchline?

Inner Dialogue Voice 2: It’s important to understand the counterarguments to your beliefs if you’re going to affect change, also penis cake.

IDV1: Penis cake?

IDV2: Penis cake.


This is not a letter from some fringe person. Judson Phillips is the president and founder of Tea Party Nation, the group that organized the 2010 National Tea Party convention keynoted by Sarah Palin. If the name sounds familiar to Minnesotans it could be because Judson Phillips and the Tea Party Nation made several statements about Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison being unfit for office in part because he is Muslim. What follows is Judson Phillips’s full statements following Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s veto of SB1062. I will be cutting in with my polite-ish thoughts.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed SB1062, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Arizona. No one has ever accused Governor Brewer of being the most courageous Republican around. Come to think of it, the word courageous and Jan Brewer have probably never been uttered in the same sentence.

Esquire magazine entitled their piece about Governor Brewer’s veto “A Profile in Courage” but do go on.

The left and the homosexual lobby in America went into overdrive to kill this bill. Conservatives rallied for this bill and Governor Brewer opted for cowardice instead of courage.

Conservatives were against this bill too. Arizona Republican Senator Jon McCain tweeted, “I hope Governor Brewer will veto SB 1062.” No ambiguity there. Opposition to this bill was bipartisan.

Why is this bill so important and what did it mean for not only Arizona but America?

The issue can be boiled down to one word: Freedom.

A free man or woman controls their labor. A slave has no control over their labor. A free man or woman decides who they will work for and under what conditions. The slave cannot.

The left and the homosexual lobby are both pushing slavery using the Orwellian concepts of “tolerance” and “inclusiveness.”

There are an estimated 30 million people in slavery today. Source. The definition of slavery used to get that number included people being used for forced labor, child prostitution, child soldiers, and forced marriages. It doesn’t include anything addressed by this bill. I also addressed this point in my previous post, but it bears repeating. If you enter into the food service industry(sticking with the wedding cake analogy) you already have thousands of regulations in place to ensure you keep a minimum level of sanitation for the sake of public health. Unless you also are prepared to call restaurant health inspectors slave owners, give the rhetoric a rest.

The law began as a response to a case in neighboring New Mexico. There, the state of New Mexico allowed a lawsuit against a Christian photographer who declined to photograph a homosexual commitment ceremony. There have been similar cases with bakers in Oregon and Colorado.

The Arizona legislature acted to preempt that happening in Arizona.

As long as sexual orientation remains absent from the protected class list in Arizona, it can’t happen. There is nothing to preempt. This bill didn’t change anything in regards to how LGBT people could be treated. For additional entertainment, I’d also recommend watching this interview in which one of the people who voted for the bill tries to justify to Anderson Cooper why it really could happen in Arizona.

Immediately the left and the homosexual lobby went into high dudgeon. Arizona’s SB1062 must be defeated because Americans really are no longer free and must be forced to serve the great liberal state, regardless of their beliefs.

The storm rose against Arizona and Jan Brewer proved she was no Ronald Reagan. She has an honored place in the ranks of the French Republicans. Corporations and business interests, many of whom support far left wing causes, like Apple demanded this bill be vetoed. Apple gives 96% of its political giving to Democrats. Why a Republican listens to a word from Apple or lifts a finger to help them is beyond comprehension. The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl from Arizona in 2015.

Someone with courage would have called their bluff. Arizona has Jan Brewer.

Three things.

1. Ronald Reagan opposed a bill when he was governor of California that would have banned homosexuals from working in the public school system.

2. You want the free market to decide everything, but then get upset when the governor listens to the free market? Apple, Delta, Verizon, and the NFL all weighed in against this bill and that represents a serious portion of jobs and income for the state. Don’t tell me we should allow money to be the ultimate decider of morality and then get defensive when the money goes against you. It reveals you’re using the free market as an excuse to cover up your inner desire to justify your bigotry.

3. Arizona has tried to call the NFL’s bluff before. The 1993 superbowl was set to be played in Tempe but got moved to Pasadena after voters in Arizona refused to recognize MLK day as a state holiday. The NFL didn’t bluff then, and it wasn’t bluffing now, especially with the NFL getting ready to draft Michael Sam.

The left came up with bizarre and insane arguments against SB1062. They tried to equate sexual preference with race. Unfortunately few will stand up against that grossly inaccurate analogy.

Remember when I said at the start of this that it’s important to understand counterarguments? The idea the sexual orientation is not a choice must be emphasized. Either that or the fact that your religion is a choice must be emphasized. Either that or both should be emphasized because both are true. Once that myth dies, so does much of the justification often used to support these things.

The left believes that it has the right to dictate what religious beliefs are allowed.

They need to be reminded what our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution say. Our rights are given to us by a higher power than the government and cannot be taken away.

Just like how you wanted to dictate whether being a Muslim was allowed in Congress? If I may quote that constitution you wanted me to read, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

The left loves to come up with absurd hypotheticals to scream that there must be compliance with their fascism, so how about a couple from our side.

Should a devout baker be required to create a cake for a homosexual wedding that has a giant phallic symbol on it or should a baker be required to create pastries for a homosexual wedding in the shape of genitallia?[SIC] Or should a photographer be required to photograph a homosexual wedding where the participants decide they want to be nude or engage in sexual behavior? Would they force a Jewish photographer to work a Klan or Nazi event? How about forcing a Muslim caterer to work a pork barbeque dinner?

SB1062 was never about discrimination. It was about the left imposing its will on Americans who disagree.

The most common victims of the left wing homosexual assault on freedom have been Christian bakers and photographers. These are not uncommon skills. In even the most rural areas you can find them.

Penis cake? Penis cake. Nice misspelling of genitalia as well, but that’s beside the point. I am glad he at least admits they are absurd hypotheticals, but I’ve heard them in other places too, so they require debunking. If you are a baker who has never baked a penis cake, and a gay couple comes in asking for one, you don’t have to bake it because it might require equipment you don’t have. I’m unfamiliar with availability of penis cake molds on the open market these days. If you are a baker who regularly bakes penis cakes for catholic priest parties, and a gay couple comes in asking for one, you do have to bake it because you’re denying the gay couple a service you already offer based upon who they are. If a Muslim caterer doesn’t already have pork on their menu, they can’t be sued to add it. If a photographer doesn’t shoot straight orgies, they can’t be sued for refusing to shoot a gay orgy. This isn’t about LGBT people asking for special treatment; this is about LGBT people asking for the same treatment.

The Jewish photographer working a Klan or Nazi event is different because neither of those are protected classes. To the best of my knowledge neither of those organizations is a race, color, national origin/ancestry, sex, religion/creed, physical/mental disability(maybe that one). This means that a business is indeed allowed to deny service to either of those groups if they wish.

Does anyone really believe these cases of Christian bakers or photographers being sued over their refusal to provide services. Over the last couple of years, a number of articles have been published in professional photography magazines about how to cater to homosexual weddings. For many photographers, this is a growth industry.

If a photographer or baker doesn’t want to take a particular job, liberty says they have the right to decide how their labor is used. Slavery is when the state tells them their labor will be used whether they like it or not.

I’m honestly confused by that first paragraph. He seems to be debunking his own argument. I think he’s saying that the free market is allowing non christian photographers to prosper therefor we shouldn’t mind the couple photographers who want to strictly obey their religious doctrine, but that’s not how business works. See all of my previous rebuttals.

If a baker doesn’t want to wash their hands between handling raw eggs and already baked products, liberty says they have a right to decide how their labor is used.

SB1062 is a bigger story than simply the story of a cowardly governor who has no core beliefs.

SB1062 is the story of liberalism at work in America.

Liberalism is the paranoid belief that leftists have that somewhere, someone may be thinking for themselves. It is the tyrannical belief that no deviation in belief is allowed from the decreed orthodoxy.

It is the antithesis of liberty.

It is tyranny on the march.

They’re nice buzzwords, but when that’s all you have left it is time to leave the policy making to those of us with substance behind our beliefs.

Does it seem obvious to most of us why SB1062 was an awful idea? Absolutely. Is similar legislation being brought up in Georgia and Pennsylvania as we speak? Sadly yes. I hope this post has helped clarify what the arguments in favor of these bills are and why they are hollow at best and bigoted at worse. This being an election year, candidates are trying to score moral victory points with this sort of legislation, so I predict we’ll be hearing these stories all year. When it’s all behind us though, I’ll be the first to order a penis cake.

As always, questions, comments, and concerns are welcome. Answers are guaranteed.



5 thoughts on “Penis Cake?

    Nancy Booth said:
    February 28, 2014 at 8:41 pm

    You continue to awe me every day! Even if I didn’t agree with everything you say (which I do) I’d be impressed with the way you it all!!

      Reed Perkins responded:
      February 28, 2014 at 9:15 pm

      I feel a little bad with this kind of post because arguing directly with someone who isn’t here to respond seems unsporting on my part. I appreciate the feedback though. It’s good to get in some practice before election season really gets going.

    Lionel said:
    February 28, 2014 at 9:59 pm

    I was curious about the idea of the Jewish race so I did little research. It seems that the USSC in 1980 decided that it was a race and therefore most likely a protected class, a distinction disdained by those of the Jewish faith. Especially see the source notes on Nazi Germany. I do wonder if the court ever reversed itself or if legislation corrected their decision. We the people do get ourselves into routine and bizarre tangles. On the other hand we get to write and speak point and counterpoint, mostly free of actual persecution. Sorry there are exceptions, Ted Cruz and the TP.
    Brewer did the right thing. I believe she is an idiot in a general sense but then what can you say, she’s a politician. They are a genus unto themselves branched from the human race. So far the same species….but I do wonder.
    Are Jews a Race?
    Retrieved from:
    In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws. Their reasoning: at the time these laws were passed, people routinely spoke of the “Jewish race” or the “Italian race” as well as the “Negro race,” so that is what the legislators intended to protect.

    But many Jews were deeply offended by that decision, offended by any hint that Jews could be considered a race. The idea of Jews as a race brings to mind nightmarish visions of Nazi Germany, where Jews were declared to be not just a race, but an inferior race that had to be rounded up into ghettos and exterminated like vermin.

    But setting aside the emotional issues, Jews are clearly not a race.

    Race is a genetic distinction, and refers to people with shared ancestry and shared genetic traits. You can’t change your race; it’s in your DNA. I could never become black or Asian no matter how much I might want to.

    Common ancestry is not required to be a Jew. Many Jews worldwide share common ancestry, as shown by genetic research; however, you can be a Jew without sharing this common ancestry, for example, by converting. Thus, although I could never become black or Asian, blacks and Asians have become Jews (Sammy Davis Jr. and Connie Chung

      Reed Perkins responded:
      March 3, 2014 at 8:18 pm

      That is interesting about the legal classification of Jewish people. Those protected classes certainly aren’t hard and fast definitions and I’m willing to bet either the KKK or Nazis could bring up a legal battle about whether or not their groups represent a national ancestry and therefor they should be free from discrimination. It’s an awkward tangle, no doubt about it.

    […] been stuck in a review rut for a while, but just like what happened back in my Penis Cake[1] post, I heard something so mind numbingly wrong, it required a response. Today we’ll be […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s