"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Should Hairdresser be Forced to Do Governor's Hair?

A gay hairdresser (wait, is that redundant?) ((just kidding)) is refusing to do the hair of New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez because she's not supportive of same-sex marriage, according to the New York Daily News reports:

“The governor’s aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in,” Antonio Darden reportedly said. “Because of her stances and her views on this, I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I’d changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no.”


“It’s just equality, dignity for everyone,” he added. “Everybody should be allowed the right to be together.”

But the question is, shouldn't Darden be forced by some human rights tribunal to do the governor's hair like those bakers were forced to bake a cake for a same-sex marriage. Now, I don't know why you'd want to force someone to do your hair or bake a cake because it seems to me that you're asking for a special ingredient in your cake or a really really bad haircut. But not forcing Darden would send a mixed message; it would tell hairdressers they can have it both ways. And we wouldn't want to do that, right?

*subhead*Both ways.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

14 comments:

Amy Giglio said...

It seems to be that if the law were to be equally applied, Darden should be compelled to cut the governor's hair or to stop cutting hair.

Gail Finke said...

No. Gay people are a protected class in NM. So it is not legal to refuse them service for being gay. Women are also a protected class, so it's not legal to refuse them service for being women -- but it is legal to refuse them service because you don't like their political views. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but there's your answer.

ProudHillbilly said...

You so know that he should be required to under the same laws that Christians are abused by. And that he won't be.

Mary De Voe said...

BULLY

cfe28a78-7a0e-11e3-b4f9-000bcdcb471e said...

Nice stereotyping Matthew, does much to further your cause. The reason is exactly what Gail is talking about. Refusing service because of someone's viewpoint is kind of ridiculous, but that is there choice.

Nik J. said...

You need to finish reading the article. He wasn't saying they need to make the hairdresser cut the governor's hair. He was pointing out the hypocrisy displayed when this is taken in the context of the gay couple successfully suing a baker for refusing to bake them a wedding cake.

cfe28a78-7a0e-11e3-b4f9-000bcdcb471e said...

Nik J. It's based on protected classes. It is obviously hypocritical. But it is not the same situation. The governor is not suing the hairdresser. Regardless, the initial stereotyping is not called for and is frankly not a Catholic response to the situation.

Gerry M said...

This just happened to me on Facebook. I commented on a meme on this topic, attacked no one, and was unfriended by the person. It was so ironic that I was excluded for my comments. Of course the person had a right to unfriend me, but that just proved my point that immoral actions (commenting with certain opinions according to the person) can legitimately exclude someone from a group (her friends) or from obtaining a service.

My blog

Maureen said...

The gov should sue the hairdresser. There is no difference between the baker, the bed & breakfast owner, and the hairdresser EXCEPT the first two are basing their choice on religious teaching. The hairdresser is just a jerk.

Christi H said...

Yeah, but the bakers didnt refuse service based off the fact their client was gay, in fact, many said they served gays gladly! They refused because it was a wedding cake for a gay marriage, which they are politically and religiously opposed to. So, in essence it amounts to the same thing. But he's right, neither should be compelled to serve anyone.

PeterK said...

The story is from 2 years ago, but putting that aside it is still interesting that the hairdresser could deny the governor

Lynda said...

What a crazy world so many are becoming accepting of! Have people been so dumbed-down and brainwashed that they want to live under tyranny. If the hairdresser is self-employed, he is free to come to separate agreements to provide services with whomever he chooses. If he has an employment contract to cut the Governor's hair, he's free to resign from his employment.

Donna M said...

oh, the protected class, gay insensitivity adversarial, argument.

Don't bother! Case in point...

When aren't their feelings hurt?

tuleesh said...

Well, they could hold a "closed-door mediation session" just like in Canada with the Sharia-observant barber and the lesbian.

Post a Comment