What if you can have your cake and eat it too? The old proverb says you can’t have both, because once you eat your cake, you no longer have it. Perhaps the government should stay out of the kitchen, because it hasn’t figured out that it can’t have it both ways. Isn’t it about time government gave up on trying to legislate morality? Just as Big Brother cannot mandate common sense, neither can it ensure that we are all good people.

Is it just me, or have we drifted way off target with legislative efforts to shield us from having our feelings hurt? When did they stop teaching “sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me”?

Generations made it through the perils of bullying and prejudice on that tested principal of simply ignoring idiots that only can cause harm if you pay attention to their actions.

But in its infinite wisdom, our government once again has created a mountain out of a mole hill. Instead of simply saying sorry your feelings were hurt, the government is attaching a $130,000 value to being offended.

That’s the case in Oregon anyway, where a bakery was forced to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple after refusing to bake their wedding cake.

Why does the government have the authority to fine the bakery, owned by a husband and wife who are devout evangelic Christians and declined the business transaction based on religious beliefs?

If we are going to require Melissa and Aaron Klein to make a lesbian wedding cake, where do we draw the line? What if the couple was black, and they chose not to fill an order placed by the local KKK group? Could the Klan’s Grand Wizard expect a $130,000 check in the mail for his emotional suffering? If the bakers were Jewish, would it be okay for them to decline to design icing swastikas for a Nazi cookie order? If ISIS is having a 9/11 celebration, must the bakery accept their order for decapitated muffins?

Is it wrong to deny a person service because of their skin color? Absolutely. It would be equally as egregious to decline service to someone due to a physical disability.

But if you own the building and the business that will lose the profits from declined sales, you should have the right to turn away customers for ideological reasons.

If you’re a Cardinals fan and you chose not to let me in to your restaurant because I have my Cubs shirt on, that’s your loss, as well as mine. Sure I don’t get to eat, but you don’t get to sell me your food. Not only that, I’m likely going to write an editorial about it, and you may lose even more customers. That would be a silly business decision on your part, but I still believe you should have the right to choose to demonstrate what you stand for.

While we are at it, why do businesses have the right to require that I wear a shirt or shoes to be served? I understand the site of my fat belly may ruin some people’s appetite for cake, but if I’m more comfortable shirtless, how dare a bakery be so prejudice as to refuse me service. Why do nudists deserve any less civil rights than homosexuals?

Why stop there? If the government is going to require businesses to serve everyone, why doesn’t it set the prices? It really isn’t fair that greedy business owners are allowed to charge higher prices, isn’t that prejudicial versus the poor?

I understand we live in a world of newly empowered political correctness, but are we not confusing civil rights with civil entitlement?

Isn’t it about time that we take responsibility for our choices? If I choose to proudly display my support of the Cubs, I best be prepared for a few boos from Cardinal Nation. That doesn’t mean I can’t continue to wear my Cubs hat, any more than it means that Cardinal fans should have to switch allegiances because their actions are hurting my feelings. I wonder if I could get the government to fine my wife’s t-shirt business if she refuses to print me some Cubs pajamas because she prefers the Redbirds? As you St. Louis fans know, being a Cubs fan has had more than its fair share of emotional suffering.

Before all you liberals label me just another right-wing religious bigot, let me shock you with this confession – I don’t think the bakery should refuse service to customers based on their sexual preference.

I believe in the Bible. I believe we are all sinners. I believe that we are called first and foremost to love one another and not to pass judgment on each other. I understand the desire not to condone or to facilitate sin, but if we chose to only serve the sinless, our customer base will shrink to just One.

Maybe that’s just a copout or a product of a politically correct world. I guess in the end, it doesn’t really matter who I think they should serve. But it shouldn’t matter who the government thinks you should or shouldn’t have to bake a cake for either, and especially not to the tune of a $135,000 fine.