August 03, 2007

Horse 788 - The Case of the Pot Calling the Kettle "Black"



Pot v. Kettle was a landmark racial discrimination case, giving people the right to make hypocritical statements without fear of retribution. It began as a civil rights case, as Kettle alleged that Pot "did not let Kettle work at the Pot's store solely in the basis of colour". What made this Supreme Court case unique was the fact that the Pot himself was black, as was the Kettle.

Kettle entered the Pot's store (which shall remain nameless) for a job interview. The interview was flatly denied by Pot, citing "irreconcilable differences". Later Pot amended the reason, saying that he mixed up his divorce papers with the job application. Pot clarified, saying "Ain't no black object gonna work at my store, no siree."

Kettle filed a lawsuit with the Local Civil Court. The lawsuit was immediately accepted and when they went to trial, many boring legal motions occurred, and eventually it was taken all the way to the Supreme Court.

Deliberations went on for weeks. The main issues were many: Does somebody have the right to discriminate against people of their own race or creed for their race or creed? Was Kettle's immediate lawsuit justified? Are inanimate objects included under the principles of juris prudence?

Eventually a massive media frenzy surrounded the case. Many rallies for both sides were held in the streets butsurprisingly, the case was not politically charged. Rather, culinary preferences charged the arguments. People who liked tea generally were on the side of Kettle, whereas people who also liked tea but preferred it in a pot were on the side of Pot. None of the chaos mattered, however. It all came down to the Court's decision.

In a surprise, Pot won the case in a 5-4 decision. Later investigations would later reveal that one of the Supreme Court judges thought that the ballot paper was an order form.

The effects of this case were twofold:
1.Inanimate objects were put under the "OK" list in the Discrimination Articles
2. People were allowed to make utterly ironic and hypocritical statements without fear of a tarnished reputation.

To this day, no inanimate object has held a major political office (with the exception of Al Gore). There have been attempts at a re-hearing for several years, but to no avail.

In popular culture, references to the case are common in instances where a pot (or kettle) makes a foolish statement in which they criticise a kettle (or pot) for holding the same traits as the pot (or kettle) making the statement.

No comments: