Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

by Simon 252 Replies latest social current

  • scotsman
    scotsman

    Custom artwork as personal service hasn’t washed with the Arizona court. It’s not free speech it’s a commercial service.

  • Simon
    Simon

    That video above is really interesting to listen to and shows how unfair the commissions actions were - it's clear that the commission were changing their decisions based on the identities of those involved rather than consistently applying the law in a dispassionate and neutral way.

    The commission was fine if a baker was refusing to add a message if that message happened to be something the commission also disagreed with, and they took the willingness of the baker to sell another cake as proof of lack of any discrimination.

    However, they then took the exact opposite stance when it came to this case because this happened to be a message they did agree with. Suddenly the exact same behavior for the exact same reason was deemed 'wrong' and they made it clear that they decided this because he was a christian and not because of the action, as they had in previous cases.

    i.e the commission demonstrated a clear double-standard.

    Custom artwork as personal service hasn’t washed with the Arizona court. It’s not free speech it’s a commercial service

    So many things have been deemed "free speech" over the years that this is clearly inconsistent and will almost certainly be challenged or will affect those other things.

    i.e. if marching, kneeling down and nude dancing are considered examples of 'free speech' then how can creating an artistic piece not be? How can is be illegal to say "sorry, I don't want to make your cake" if it is OK to have signs saying "god hates fags"?

    Contradictions in the law have to be corrected and something will have to give. I expect that petty things like this will be the thing that are corrected because there are more important laws about compelled speech and the case is clearly without merit from a legal perspective when considered alongside other cases - it only succeeded because of bias and overreach by particular government agencies and the supreme court is there to protect against those under the constitution.

  • scotsman
    scotsman

    Neither NFL players nor Westboro are selling a commercial service.

  • TD
    TD

    Simon

    If you want a custom cake you are then booking a personal service and the person who is going to perform that service has the right to turn it down for whatever reason then want if it's in support of something they don't agree with or for someone they don't like.

    I don't disagree, but that's obviously not going to fly if you publicly promote your business like this:

    If you can think it up, Jack can make it into a cake!

    Masterpiece Cakes are perfect for special occasions, and they taste incredible. Choose from any of our many flavors, frostings, and fillings for your wedding, birthday, or specialty cake.

    It’s not just a cake … It’s a Masterpiece!

    Anti-discrimination law does not separate retail sales from personalized services. The operative term, is "Public Accommodation" which means:

    "....all establishments offering their services, facilities or goods to or soliciting patronage from the members of the general public."

    What happens when some Westboro Baptist Church type group orders a "god hates gays" cake from a gay baker - can they refuse?

    He would have a tough time refusing if the sign on his window reads, "If you can think it up I will write it on a cake!"

    Even at the grocery store level though, most bakeries have a disclaimer when it comes to slogans and messages.

  • Finkelstein
  • Simon
    Simon
    Neither NFL players nor Westboro are selling a commercial service.

    Must be hard not walking into things with those blinkers on!

    It's about what constitutes free speech and compelled speech and people's freedom of conscience and belief.

    Beware of wishing for laws that can be used in ways that weren't intended.

    most bakeries have a disclaimer when it comes to slogans and messages.

    Right, and you think it should be the government to decide what those individual stores find acceptable or not? Will there be an official ministry of cake messages and a separate bureaucracy overseeing greeting cards and messages-with-flowers?

    People looking for "perfection" in a system shouldn't imagine that the government-controlled one will be that perfection and will come cheap. Sometimes, someone who maybe should have gotten a cake may not get one but overall, having personal discretion for the store owner to make their own choices at the local level is the best system we're likely to get.

  • TD
    TD

    Will there be an official ministry of cake messages..

    That would have made a great Monty Python skit. (Mental picture of Eric Idle in a chef's hat....)

    On a more serious note, do you think a line should be drawn at all? Farther up this thread I mentioned Maurice Bessinger, the barbecue restaurateur who refused to serve people of color because he believed God hates integration.

    That this was wrong might seem like a no-brainer today, but at the time, it took the government and the courts to put an end to that crap.

  • Simon
    Simon
    do you think a line should be drawn at all? I mentioned Maurice Bessinger, the barbecue restaurateur who refused to serve people of color because he believed God hates integration.

    As I said, I think people are too focused on looking for a perfect system for something that can never be perfect and the government being able to force people to do things they don't want to do is a worse option than some people occasionally being discriminated against and often, not even that.

    At the fundamental level, no one has a right to your skills and labor. No one should be able to force you to say things you don't want to, least of all the government. That is a very very slippery slope.

    It is of course a leftist belief that the "government" should know best and tell everyone what to do but specifically only if it's their chosen government telling others what to do.

    The problem with these laws is that they are unworkable because of all the contradictions that arise and become tools of misuse and abuse.

  • scotsman
    scotsman

    Ah, the slippery slope.

  • nugget
    nugget

    I wouldn't want someone with such a strong religious bias to make anything for me. However does he refuse to make wedding cakes for couples who cohabit and atheists? Does he refuse to make Halloween cakes or pagan cakes? If this is souly about his religious viewpoint not about prejudice then he would need to be consistent.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit