Bakery Lost Discrimination Case

[Solitary]

Only religion can make things so complicated with their BS. Doesn't gay marriage support marriage. When did it become between man and woman only. When blacks and whites wanted to get married you heard the same objections. Why is it anyone else's business what anyone does if it doesn't hurt anyone? Religion is suppose to bring people together with love, not discriminate with bigotry and hate. What would Jesus do?  Solitary

[marymargaret]

First link isn't posted properly, FYI.

Shol"va- if you have a facebook account you can search Masterpiece cakeshop- that's where I found the links- they just don't relink here- I'm not sure why.

[Mermaid]

If the baker didn't want to serve a couple because they were of different races, this would not be an issue. Of COURSE they lost the case.

[PopeyesPappy]

Because the surgeon is in the employ of the hospital owner, and therefore follows hospital policy.

So it would be ok if it was a Christian hospital run by fundamentalists with a policy to refuse emergency services to homosexuals?

[GalacticBusDriver]

No matter which side you're on in this debate, this is a troubling trend. The bakery refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple and were taken to court. They lost and will no longer offer wedding cakes for anyone. They will bake birthday cupcakes for gays, they just won't support gay marriage due to their religious beliefs. The court ruled they they can't refuse to serve gays and now orders the bakery to submit quarterly reports about the customers he refuses to serve and retrain employees to serve everyone. Isn't this a little extreme? I'm pretty sure businesses refuse to deal with people for all sorts of reasons. We, as consumers, can choose to support their policies or not.

This seems to be a trend of entitled attitudes and vengeance on both sides. It will further divide people and may even back fire on their causes. I don't want to see people treated badly, but I also don't want to see others bullied into compliance. Running a small business is tough enough without having to deal with social agendas.

I'm not religious but I'm uncomfortable with this because it always gets worse. Do you think this is fair?

Let's try some perspective:

No matter which side you're on in this debate, this is a troubling trend. The bakery refused to make a wedding cake for a black couple and were taken to court. They lost and will no longer offer wedding cakes for anyone. They will bake birthday cupcakes for blacks, they just won't support black marriage due to their religious beliefs. The court ruled they they can't refuse to serve blacks and now orders the bakery to submit quarterly reports about the customers he refuses to serve and retrain employees to serve everyone. Isn't this a little extreme? I'm pretty sure businesses refuse to deal with people for all sorts of reasons. We, as consumers, can choose to support their policies or not.

This seems to be a trend of entitled attitudes and vengeance on both sides. It will further divide people and may even back fire on their causes. I don't want to see people treated badly, but I also don't want to see others bullied into compliance. Running a small business is tough enough without having to deal with social agendas.

I'm not religious but I'm uncomfortable with this because it always gets worse. Do you think this is fair?

have you ever been mistreated by a rude store clerk or owner?

Yes I have. And I've been treated like crap by customers. Never for the color of my skin or my preference of bed partners though. There's a difference between being an asshole and being a bigot.

Let me play devil's advocate- what if the bulk of the barker's business comes from the church going crowd in that community? Yeah- I know- ugly hypocrisy- but that is the level of consciousness we're dealing with in this scenario. If he agrees to make the gay couple's cake- he loses all his customers and his livelihood. If he refuses - he's taken to court and has to adjust his business plan to comply with the court ruling and in doing so, loses a large chuck of his business because he can no longer offer wedding cakes- (a big ticket item, BTW). So, now he has to find a way to make up for that loss of revenue. Will the gay community vow to make up for his losses in return for his support? Is it even fair to expect that from them?

His right to do business as he pleases ends when he violates the rights of someone. You can hop up and down yelling "It's only a wedding cake!" all day long but it doesn't change the fact that he's wrong. If he gets away with it, others will try. In a large town it may be of little consequence since there are plenty of bakers (or any other service). In a small town in rural Oklahoma (for example) there may only be one.

This goes beyond gay/xtian fighting. This dictates how a person is allowed to run a business. Refusing that couple a cake didn't revoke their right to get married, didn't prevent them from having a reception and a cake from another bakery- so how exactly did the baker harm them? No one has to agree with him and can take their business elsewhere- it's their freedom of choice. The baker had limited choice- he had to give up part of his business by court order because they didn't like his attitude.

You're damned right it dictates how he is allowed to run his busines because by law he is not allowed to discriminate.

I think it's wrong to equate minor annoyances with truly despicable hate crimes. I don't know the baker. Did he go out of his way to cause trouble or harass this couple? Did he interfere with their livelihood?  Things can get out of hand if people get too caught up in grievance agendas. They can sometimes do worse harm than what they experienced and feel smugly satisfied about it.       

Where do you draw the line? Not at buying cakes, obviously. Buying food staples maybe? How about medicines? Health care? Or do we have to wait until the baker starts physically harming gay couples who had the audacity to ask him to do what he's in business to do? Do we have to wait until he kills them?

There's a real simple way to avoid the whole problem. Sell them the cake. If he really can't bring himself to do that then I recommend he find a new profession where his bigotry won't be an issue.

This might give more information about the legal ruling. The comments section is a flame war- read at your own risk! There was another article that revealed more info on the baker's policies. He also won't bake cakes for Halloween or Bachelor parties. It also says he makes birthday cakes regularly for a lesbian couple.

This actually makes him look like an even worse bigot and really undermines his "religious belief" argument. He should get out of the service industry completely. Maybe become a pastor where he can turn his bigotry into profit.

[GSOgymrat]

"I see you are wearing a crucifix. I'm sorry but I don't serve Christians." I wonder how well that would go over.

I don't see the difference between "No gays" and "No colored".

This case isn't about a baker not wanting to do business with a particular individual but discriminating against an entire group of people. There is a difference.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Who can say if people from either side deliberately seek out conflict to draw attention to their cause.

Who can say? Let me be the first.  Yes, they do. Sometimes we even refer to it as war.

[marymargaret]

I agree that religious people can be biased- their religious practice requires it in some cases. I don't agree with it and I'm not trying to trivialize how anyone would feel in that situation. I'm just seeing the possibility of people going about this problem in ways that may cause more negative reactions.

If the baker simply said he was booked and referred them to another baker it wouldn't be a news story. He felt the need to make his religious beliefs  an issue and the gay couple decided that they needed to punish him for hurting their feelings. He does make birthday cakes and other baked goods for gay people- he just feels that he can't support their marriage by making a wedding cake. I read a bit more about him, his kids have gay friends from school and they say he has no problem with them. It would be nice if grown people could come to an agreeable compromise. 

It's really human nature, no matter your race, sexual orientation, or religious/non-religious identity. Haven't you ever see someone blow something way out of proportion? We are a society of reality show celebrities- many people want their 15 minutes of fame. The religious guy will get plenty of support from his fellow church goers, they'll crusade for him if they have to, I'll bet. The gay couple will be cause celebrities in their community- each retelling of the experience will be more dramatic. I read an article where the couple said they were ecstatic about the outcome. IDK, maybe it's just me, but if the couple had said something like- we're sad that it had to come to this. We wish we didn't have to take it to court and we hope that it doesn't cause bad feelings - or something to that effect- it would sound sincere. They sound petty and a bit smug. The religious guy sounds self righteous. The comments following the articles are ugly and adding fuel to the fire. 

Everyone gets discriminated against at some point in their lives- we're a superficial species. I don't support any discrimination. No person capable of empathy could.
 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So it would be ok if it was a Christian hospital run by fundamentalists with a policy to refuse emergency services to homosexuals?

I know what you want.  You want me to either say "let him die" or carve out a self-serving exception.  But do you seriously honestly want to force someone to operate on you who despises you?

Think about it.  Surgery.  A very delicate and highly involved process, even when it is minor surgery.  There is so much that can go wrong.  If you have someone who does NOT want to be there, does NOT want to operate on a given patient, do you REALLY want to put your life in that person's hands?  Seriously?

Do you think that is a smart thing to do?

Imagine the baker again.  Suppose the court ordered him to bake that particular cake.  Not "either bake it for everybody or bake it for nobody" but "you will bake that particular cake."  How could that possibly go wrong?

"Oops, it appears we forgot to add the sugar."  Or worse "Oops, it appears that we used salt instead of sugar, our bad.  It was an accident."

Or another case, a photographer, because that was in the news not long ago.  "Oops, I forgot to take the lens cap off."

And you want to use force on a surgeon?  Seriously?

That's insane.  I would rather NOT say "I'm going to put a gun to your head so that you will accept the responsibility of my life in your hands."  And yet for some reason you think my position of "If you don't want to do business with me I don't want to do business with you" is unreasonable.

Seriously, you want to force a surgeon?

[stromboli]

"I see you are wearing a crucifix. I'm sorry but I don't serve Christians." I wonder how well that would go over.

I don't see the difference between "No gays" and "No colored".

This case isn't about a baker not wanting to do business with a particular individual but discriminating against an entire group of people. There is a difference.

^this. Forget the surgeon analogy. It is a simple case where someone is excluded service for being something not desirable in the eyes of the baker. the race discrimination thing is a better comparison.

[PopeyesPappy]

What I want Jason is for anyone that operates a business to be required to treat all potential customers the same with regard to ethnicity, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other of the various reasons people use to feel superior to others. No exceptions for the baker or the surgeon.  If they can't do that then they shouldn't be allowed to do business.

[marymargaret]

Think about it.  Surgery.  A very delicate and highly involved process, even when it is minor surgery.  There is so much that can go wrong.  If you have someone who does NOT want to be there, does NOT want to operate on a given patient, do you REALLY want to put your life in that person's hands?  Seriously?

Do you think that is a smart thing to do?

Seriously, you want to force a surgeon?

If I go into a new hair salon- I don't want the pissed off stylist anywhere near my hair with scissors!

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What I want Jason is for anyone that operates a business to be required to treat all potential customers the same with regard to ethnicity, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other of the various reasons people use to feel superior to others. No exceptions for the baker or the surgeon.  If they can't do that then they shouldn't be allowed to do business.

The surgeon analogy was stupid.  The baker is not infringing on the rights of the gay couple.  By not baking for them he is not making them not married.  The same applies if you swap race for orientation.

PopeyesPappy, you are ready to punish people for thoughtcrime.  Now supposing we go down that road.  You get laws implemented that say "if you do not serve people you despise you have to shut down your business."  Of course we're going to ignore the poor service response that you have just pretended away.  We're going to assume that pointing a gun at people and forcing them to conform to what you think is right will actually work.

Next election cycle.  New crop of politicians get their hands on that power.  They take the rules about how the government can force businesses.  They say "new rule, instead of including group X now you must exclude group X."

Nope, that will also be wished away.

Would you care to address the possibility of a photographer who "accidentally" leaves the lens cap on?



Now suppose, the baker had responded differently.   Instead of saying "I don't want to do business with you because you are in group X" the baker had said "You don't want to do business with me because I am prejudiced against group X".  An interesting supposition.  It seems that my idea that people get perverse satisfaction from forcing bigots to wait on them might actually be close to the truth.

[marymargaret]

What I want Jason is for anyone that operates a business to be required to treat all potential customers the same with regard to ethnicity, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other of the various reasons people use to feel superior to others. No exceptions for the baker or the surgeon.  If they can't do that then they shouldn't be allowed to do business.

Sorry to butt in here- I know you're addressing Jason, but I see stuff like this all the time. Not just gays, but people who aren't dressed as well as others, people who are socially awkward, people who aren't attractive, and on and on. Not just one particular group but just people in general. If every one of them went to court- they would shut the whole system down. People need to find a better way to resolve their problems and maybe, just maybe, find that they have something in common and see each other as people rather than an agenda pusher.

[PopeyesPappy]

The surgeon analogy was stupid.  The baker is not infringing on the rights of the gay couple.  By not baking for them he is not making them not married.  The same applies if you swap race for orientation.

PopeyesPappy, you are ready to punish people for thoughtcrime.  Now supposing we go down that road.  You get laws implemented that say "if you do not serve people you despise you have to shut down your business."  Of course we're going to ignore the poor service response that you have just pretended away.  We're going to assume that pointing a gun at people and forcing them to conform to what you think is right will actually work.

Next election cycle.  New crop of politicians get their hands on that power.  They take the rules about how the government can force businesses.  They say "new rule, instead of including group X now you must exclude group X."

Nope, that will also be wished away.

Would you care to address the possibility of a photographer who "accidentally" leaves the lens cap on?



Now suppose, the baker had responded differently.   Instead of saying "I don't want to do business with you because you are in group X" the baker had said "You don't want to do business with me because I am prejudiced against group X".  An interesting supposition.  It seems that my idea that people get perverse satisfaction from forcing bigots to wait on them might actually be close to the truth.

Not so much stupid as admittedly extreme. However the principle is the same be it race or sexual orientation, baker or surgeon. Discrimination is discrimination and it does affect the rights of the gay couples in the same way it affects the rights of blacks. Whether we are talking about buying a cake or sitting in the front of the bus allowing businesses or business owners to discriminate against gay couples is no different than allowing white only counters at the local diner. Both are wrong. Both are wrong for the same reasons. The courts have recognized that both are wrong for the same reasons. Yea for the courts, and fucking to bad so sad for the bigoted assholes that aren't allowed to legally discriminate.