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

by Simon 286 Replies latest social current

• 

  MrRoboto

  Wow this must be one of the fastest growing threads I've ever seen..

  Yeah kinda funny how refusing to put objectionable content on a cake gets turned into refusing service wholesale.

  That's like listening to some hardcore rap on the radio and then suing because they bleeped over all the swearing..... Oh but it is so personal! Nevermind that that I still got to listen to the music.

  Frivolous suits like this need to be dealt with in a way that discourages them and those who seek them out and those who invite others to do so. This was obviously a program of attack as there was a wave of these in different places at the same time.

  Now that the baker won, who is going to help them recoup all the lost money this has caused? Who is going to fix all the damage that was done to the other victims? Noone.

  When winning is still losing.
• 

  _Morpheus

  @john- so if larry flint demanded a pornographic cake you would be ok with the court forcing the baker to make it?
• 

  snugglebunny

  This thread is descending into whataboutery. You can prove almost anything with whataboutery! What's clear is that not supporting same-sex marriage does not make you a homophobe, although the word has now become so over-used it's virtually meaningless. It just means that you're a traditionalist when it comes to marriage and that doing anything that indicates a person's tacit approval of same-sex marriage is not for you. So you're going to give it a miss.
• 

  blownaway

  The issue is not a cake, the issue is making or participating in something against your religion. So as far as Hollyweird and the left tards go would they make a Muslim make a cake that said kill Allah? The Co. cake maker said he would make a cake for them not one themed for a gay wedding. What about a Muslim Carpenter to make a gay porn theater? The left is so far gone they don't know which way is up.
  
• 

  Drearyweather

  Seems that the Colorado Commission is fine if a baker (who supported LGBT community) refused to bake cakes with anti-gay messages, but doesn't agree if a religious baker refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings.
  

  Am I right?

  Something that I read in the supreme court ruling:

  https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4493287-SCOTUS-Masterpiece-Cakeshop-Decision.html#document/p2

  "Another indication of hostility is the different treatment of Phillips’ case and the cases of other bakers with objections to anti-gay messages who prevailed before the Commission. The Commission ruled against Phillips in part on the theory that any message on the requested wedding cake would be attributed to the customer, not to the baker. Yet the Division did not address this point in any of the cases involving requests for cakes depicting anti-gay marriage symbolism." - Page 2
• 

  _Morpheus

  What's clear is that not supporting same-sex marriage does not make you a homophobe, although the word has now become so over-used it's virtually meaningless

  X2

  Seems that the Colorado Commission is fine if a baker (who supported LGBT community) refused to bake cakes with anti-gay messages, but doesn't agree if a religious baker refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings.

  Yep. But thats ok because it goes the way the radical left wants.
  
  
  
• 

  sparky1

  The issue is really quite simple:

  If I own a 'convenience store' and do not sell beer or alcoholic beverages in any form because of my conscience views on the matter, that is my choice. A customer can not enter my store and claim that since I sell other forms of liquid refreshment, that I MUST provide them with an alcoholic beverage because it is the customers right to consume alcoholic beverages. The government does not have the right to compel me to provide goods and services that I do not wish to provide to the public. I have my rights and the consumer of alcohol has theirs. I do not wish to compel the drinker to stop drinking but do have a right not to provide the alcohol to him.

  It is the same with the owner of the bakery. He did not wish to stop the gay people from living their chosen lifestyle but felt it was his right to not bake a gay themed wedding cake. LoveUniHateExams is pointing out one of the fundamental functions of a 'free market'. Buyers and sellers in the market place both have choices and are rewarded or punished by the market because of the choices that they make. Gay people should realize how lucky some of them are to live in a tolerant Western society that accords them the dignity and rights equal to that of their fellow citizens. Now gay people should realize that others have rights and free choice also and that even those who disagree with them should not be compelled to do their bidding.
  
• 

  Simon

  But thats ok because it goes the way the radical left wants.

  Too many people have a blinkered view that is based solely on whether they think gay marriage should be legal or not instead of looking at the bigger principle of whether someone should be able to compel you to produce or say things that you don't want to.

  And just because something is legal doesn't mean that everyone has to celebrate or promote it and not doing so doesn't make them 'anti' or an '-ophobe' of the thing.
• 

  truth_b_known

  Wow! This thread got 8 pages deep before I found it. Time to join the fray...

  This court case needs to be boiled down to the simplest of terms -

  In a free society, should a private citizen who owns a private business be compelled by the government to provide goods or service to to another private citizen?

  Answer - No. Never.

  Living in a free society can be a two-edged sword. There is a difference between right or wrong and legal or illegal. Some things many deem wrong are not illegal.

  Racism and bigotry are real. Bigotry towards gender, sexuality, religion, etc. are all alive and practiced daily in societies free or otherwise. However, in a free society, morality should never be compelled by the government. Unfortunately groups on both sides of the spectrum are demanding the government impose their version of morality on the populace.

  In the United States, only the government must provide its services to all persons regardless of who they are.

  The only thing that upsets me about this story is that 2 out of the 9 Supreme Court Justices voted to compel the citizens of this nation to use their time and resources to do something they do not wish to do.
• 

  dozy

  The legislation in the UK is different , as it is a more secular country here. Bakers have to bake a cake celebrating gay marriage , otherwise they will be prosecuted under discrimination legislation. Personally , I don't agree with that , but its been tested in the courts here several times - currently it is being argued right the way up to the supreme court , who are due to give a decision later this year.

  https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/01/gay-marriage-cake-ashers-bakery-northern-ireland-uk-supreme-court