On Topic Discussion So, should the baker be legally compelled to make the gay wedding cake? (US Supreme Court)

[peeonme]

I voted unsure because I have some concerns.

If the couple asked for the bakery to make a cake without two men as the topper, or any LGBT rainbow flags or anything to correlate it was homosexual related, would the bakery still make the cake or not.

Because I feel if the men just went in there and said they were getting married and asked for a plain cake without any LGBT decorations, I'm unsure (which is why I voted) if they would still bake the cake or not.

I think they would, so in essence, they aren't necessarily discriminating against a gay couple.

But if they outright say, "no gays allowed as customers in the bakery", then no that's fucked up. So I don't blame them for suing. But again, I'm unsure if that's the case here.

This is the complicated part of it.

To refuse service to a couple who are going to be legally married is wrong. What if it was a white female and a black male represented on top of the cake?
Discrimination is always wrong.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

So inspiring to see in 2017 people are still grappling with the tough questions of the universe like "Should all people be treated equally?"

 

[gsdx]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If an engaged couple went into a bakery and asked for a wedding cake with angel and cross decorations and the cake-top couple standing on a Bible and the baker said, "Sorry. Your beliefs offend mine. I cannot make your cake for you," there would be hell to pay.

 

[eastofeden]

The problem is that any business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone....

I have always assumed that was reserved for patrons who were drunk or violent or abusive....

So my question is.....why is it important who or what anyone does with their damn cakes? What if the pedophiles had a meeting and decided to have a cake baked for refreshments? What is ISIS wanted a cake baked? If they didn't say it was ISIS...and they ate the cake to celebrate before they blew up 1200 people?

What is the guy in Vegas wanted a cake to eat before he went on his shooting spree? What about Wiccans?...or Satanists? Do they get a cake?......

It is discrimination because if the Christians had their way they wouldn't serve lot of people...so they need a fucking sign that states who they will not serve.

Personally...I don't think they should be in the business of serving the public if they want to discriminate against ANYONE for who are what they are...and the signs are the way they will be out of business....FAST...which is why I suggested them....

Without the signs..you have to hear about religious oppression for the people who oppress us which makes me wanna barf after my ears stop bleeding...

I don't go to Chick Fil-A or Hobby Lobby...and Michaels is 20 more miles than Hobby Lobby for me. I know who they are and what they stand for.

I wouldn't eat Papa Johns either....

 

[rareboy]

So inspiring to see in 2017 people are still grappling with the tough questions of the universe like "Should all people be treated equally?"

Thank you for clearing this up.

 

[purina]

Cake is bad.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

The problem is that any business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone....

I have always assumed that was reserved for patrons who were drunk or violent or abusive....[/QUOTE]

BINGO

So my question is.....why is it important who or what anyone does with their damn cakes? What if the pedophiles had a meeting and decided to have a cake baked for refreshments? What is ISIS wanted a cake baked? If they didn't say it was ISIS...and they ate the cake to celebrate before they blew up 1200 people?

What is the guy in Vegas wanted a cake to eat before he went on his shooting spree? What about Wiccans?...or Satanists? Do they get a cake?......

You lost me here, I don't see the parallel between a gay couple wanting a wedding cake and pedophiles or terrorists or mass murderers wanting a cake.

 

[peeonme]

The problem is that any business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone....

I have always assumed that was reserved for patrons who were drunk or violent or abusive....

So my question is.....why is it important who or what anyone does with their damn cakes? What if the pedophiles had a meeting and decided to have a cake baked for refreshments? What is ISIS wanted a cake baked? If they didn't say it was ISIS...and they ate the cake to celebrate before they blew up 1200 people?

What is the guy in Vegas wanted a cake to eat before he went on his shooting spree? What about Wiccans?...or Satanists? Do they get a cake?......

It is discrimination because if the Christians had their way they wouldn't serve lot of people...so they need a fucking sign that states who they will not serve.

Personally...I don't think they should be in the business of serving the public if they want to discriminate against ANYONE for who are what they are...and the signs are the way they will be out of business....FAST...which is why I suggested them....

Without the signs..you have to hear about religious oppression for the people who oppress us which makes me wanna barf after my ears stop bleeding...

I don't go to Chick Fil-A or Hobby Lobby...and Michaels is 20 more miles than Hobby Lobby for me. I know who they are and what they stand for.

I wouldn't eat Papa Johns either....

They do not have the right to refuse service, if I have a restaurant I can not pick and choose if I am open to the general public.

Now, can they have their cake and eat it too? Legally they could refuse to make a cake that would have obscenities or that would reflect
a practice that would be outside of the scope of 'normalcy' such as a cake that would depict or reflect pedophilia.

Could they refuse to make a cake for a bar mitzvah? Or for an Islamic event? Not if they didn't want to face a lawsuit.

Now, I can't go to McDonald's and order a steak and then sue them for discrimination if they don't prepare a steak for me. They have a menu and I have to order from it to eat there.

Any bakery that wishes to avoid a problem should have a brochure showing specifically what products they offer with a clear statement that they do not vary from it or take special orders.

If they go 'custom' or to order for one, then they have set a precedent.

I would never want to place an order with such an establishment, but that doesn't mean that I should not expect them to do it if I choose to.

 

[eastofeden]

I have always assumed that was reserved for patrons who were drunk or violent or abusive....

BINGO



You lost me here, I don't see the parallel between a gay couple wanting a wedding cake and pedophiles or terrorists or mass murderers wanting a cake.

I am assuming that they are stating that their religious convictions are being violated.....

So...if serving gay people is against their religious convictions..shouldn't alot of other things be on that list?

What if they made a cake for adulterers?...or sloths?...or whores?

..and since they like Leviticus so much..how about not serving people who have two different fabrics on?...or farmers who planted two different crops in the same field?...or how about a child who has spoken against their parents? Certainly no birthday cake for them....

I want to illustrate their hypocrisy and ridiculousness These are the whiners who worked very hard to oppress other people 24/7 citing "oppression"....

They don't think it is discrimination.....

I know it is..you know it is...but they want to play the biblical principle game....

I say GAME ON...let them play it...but they don't get to make all the rules....

If they want to use the biblical principle card...they need to answer alot of hypothetical questions....hence my examples.

 

[G-Lexington]

You lost me here, I don't see the parallel between a gay couple wanting a wedding cake and pedophiles or terrorists or mass murderers wanting a cake.

And I don't see the difference. If they don't want to make a cake for somebody, they shouldn't have to.

Why would anyone want a cake from a place that had to make it under duress, or under court order? You know the cake isn't going to be their best work.

Lex

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

And I don't see the difference. If they don't want to make a cake for somebody, they shouldn't have to.

Then they need to find their own independent piece of land where they can govern themselves cuz here in good ole US of A that's called discrimination. Bitch you're going to smile take my money and make my damn cake and I'm going to be SO extra thankful when I leave with it.

Me walking out with my cake

 

[peeonme]

And I don't see the difference. If they don't want to make a cake for somebody, they shouldn't have to.

Why would anyone want a cake from a place that had to make it under duress, or under court order? You know the cake isn't going to be their best work.

Lex

So, the hotel or motel can refuse service to gays, blacks, Moslems... or anyone that isn't a wasp?
No one in their right mind would want their cake baked by these people, but, if they 'win' the right to refuse because of sexual orientation and it is allowed to stand the discrimination can spread to other businesses, which can point to a legal precedent established by a bakery.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

So, the hotel or motel can refuse service to gays, blacks, Moslems... or anyone that isn't a wasp?
No one in their right mind would want their cake baked by these people, but, if they 'win' the right to refuse because of sexual orientation and it is allowed to stand the discrimination can spread to other businesses, which can point to a legal precedent established by a bakery.

Get out of my head.

 

[eastofeden]

They do not have the right to refuse service, if I have a restaurant I can not pick and choose if I am open to the general public.

Now, can they have their cake and eat it too? Legally they could refuse to make a cake that would have obscenities or that would reflect
a practice that would be outside of the scope of 'normalcy' such as a cake that would depict or reflect pedophilia.

Could they refuse to make a cake for a bar mitzvah? Or for an Islamic event? Not if they didn't want to face a lawsuit.

Now, I can't go to McDonald's and order a steak and then sue them for discrimination if they don't prepare a steak for me. They have a menu and I have to order from it to eat there.

Any bakery that wishes to avoid a problem should have a brochure showing specifically what products they offer with a clear statement that they do not vary from it or take special orders.

If they go 'custom' or to order for one, then they have set a precedent.

I would never want to place an order with such an establishment, but that doesn't mean that I should not expect them to do it if I choose to.

My point is that they don't think it is discrimination...they think it is religious freedom....

So maybe their religion should be on trial since that is their defense....

 

[Benvolio]

The baker would lose on the religious argument by itself. Religion is seldom allowed to avoid obligations or hurt others. It comes up when parents refuse medical treatment to children on the basis of religion. The courts usually order the treatment. Prisoners often try to manipulate their conditions based on supposed religious entitlements or obligations. It usually works only if required by an established religious organization, as Jews and Muslims avoiding pork will be accommodated.
The freedom of speech argument will win to the extent of protecting their right to refuse decorating.

 

[G-Lexington]

So, the hotel or motel can refuse service to gays, blacks, Moslems... or anyone that isn't a wasp?
No one in their right mind would want their cake baked by these people, but, if they 'win' the right to refuse because of sexual orientation and it is allowed to stand the discrimination can spread to other businesses, which can point to a legal precedent established by a bakery.

Hotels offer identical rooms to everybody who visits. If someone goes into a hotel and asks for something that they do not irdinarily offer - if a Moslem asks for a prayer rug to be placed in their room, for instance - they can say they do not offer that service. I doubt anybody would consider that discriminatory.

These people did not ask for an off-the-rack wedding cake. They wanted one made to their specifications. And the proprietor should have every right to turn such a request down.

Lex

 

[purina]

Writing Adam and Stephen is no more out of the ordinary than writing Adam and Stephanie.

 

[Telstra]

Morally yes he has to make the cake.
But the market will sort out weather people want to buy stuff from his shop.

Also the shop owner should put up a sign saying what sort of cakes they cannot make because of religious reasons.

 

[freefall]

First of all, haven't similar cases of bakeries refusing service to gay couples been around for years? The highlighting of these cases is seriously late by so many years.

Also, why should the law actually meddle in the messy creamy situation? Nowadays everything just has to be law-settled, lawsuits, and all. So these people are exercising their religious/other freedom. Let them be and let people be their judge. It's not like he's the only baker in the whole nation capable and competent in making wedding cakes.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

What I keep hearing in this thread "It's ok for businesses to treat gay people like second class citizens."