Bakery Lost Discrimination Case

[marymargaret]

You sure didn't say it straight. But from the post you addressed to me (accepting being rude to a customer as equal to refusing service to people because of their identity) and to repeatedly telling why these people are being let to carry this to court instead of sucking it, (sorry, try to make up and kiss) because system would shout down (?). All you offer is how can we stop people pushing for equality with the most civilised way we invented so far as species.

By the way, carrying a problem to court to be solved -esp a one emerging from a deep issue- IS being rational by definition. Being emotional is doing something extreme, or violent to 'solve' it. Like what happens mostly when people try to solve it between them.

I'm not sure I'm following you - so please bear with me. Wouldn't rude behaviour result from someone judging another person unworthy or of lesser status for whatever reason? From what I've read, the couple received many offers for a free cake from all over. They did get a cake from another local baker. 

So- the only answer to disagreement is going to court? We could just keep expanding the system to accommodate the volume, I guess, but wouldn't this start to affect society in a negative way? People are known for turning a good thing into oppression. Over use and abuse of a system only makes it better-right? More litigation will make things more meaningful and bring people together- right?

I don't recall either party in this story threatening each other. Others reacted negatively and were verbally abusive to the baker- should he now sue? People (on either side of the issue) who had nothing to do with the encounter felt entitled to vent their outrage so that they could be a part of it. How angry do you feel about all this?

When I posted this topic- I did expect reaction in support of either side, but I'm surprised at some of the intensity. This is a first world problem- do you think this rises to the scale of problems other people face?

[GalacticBusDriver]

You mean you've never been slighted or treated differently than other people? Years ago I remember going to a posh store at the mall to buy a gift for my friend- that happened to be the only place that carried it. There was a person ahead of me and I waited my turn. The snotty clerk looked at my purchase and went to another customer with a more expensive purchase instead of just cashing my quick purchase out. I waited, and she did finally deign to wait on me with no apology. I wonder what she didn't like about me- wasn't I dressed well enough or was my purchase too small to matter? Was she a snob or was she told to put the big spenders first? If I was the crabby person I am now- I would have called her out on it and left. Needless to say I wouldn't shop there again. Funny, when the economy went bad and Amazon came online- that posh store closed. I certainly wasn't treated well and was made to feel like less of a person- I didn't take anyone to court. Maybe you think we all should. Or maybe only certain groups should. I'm really not trying to be difficult- I just want to know how far you think this should go.

What you're describing above is snobbery or assholishness, not bigotry which is what the baker is guilty of. Treating someone poorly, regardless of reason, makes you an asshole. Treating someone poorly, because they are part of a particular group and for no other reason, makes you a bigot. The baker refused them because they were part of a particular group. If you can't see the difference here then I am truly sorry for you.

[marymargaret]

What you're describing above is snobbery or assholishness, not bigotry which is what the baker is guilty of. Treating someone poorly, regardless of reason, makes you an asshole. Treating someone poorly, because they are part of a particular group and for no other reason, makes you a bigot. The baker refused them because they were part of a particular group. If you can't see the difference here then I am truly sorry for you.

I know what bigotry feels like- I've been singled out for being the wrong nationality, religion, later- no religion. The article stated that the baker does do business with gays- he just didn't want to make the wedding cake. His issue appears to be the marriage aspect. I'm not taking his side, but I don't think this rises to the level of having a burning cross on your lawn or hate speech spray painted on your property or shunning. He wasn't the only game in town. What this whole exercise illustrates is how blown out of proportion things can get.

No one has answered what exact damage was done to this couple. The baker, bigot, dumbass, or however you want to describe him, didn't prevent them from fulfilling their plans. I understand that people here dislike religion, I'm not a fan of it, myself. Unfortunately, people are going to to disagree over matters. It would be nice if people on both sides could respect each others' choices provided that they are not malicious in nature.

There's really no need for condescension - we don't know each other. Forums are a place for debate and an exchange of ideas, opinions -no? What's to be learned in an echo chamber?

[SGOS]

I know what bigotry feels like- I've been singled out for being the wrong nationality, religion, later- no religion. The article stated that the baker does do business with gays- he just didn't want to make the wedding cake. His issue appears to be the marriage aspect. I'm not taking his side, but I don't think this rises to the level of having a burning cross on your lawn or hate speech spray painted on your property or shunning. He wasn't the only game in town. What this whole exercise illustrates is how blown out of proportion things can get.

I'm not sure what side you are on here, and I don't care that much.  You did say a couple of times you wanted to play the Devil's advocate.  OK, so the advocates position was attacked.  First of all, this is an emotional issue, it's an emotional issue for the baker, and it's an emotional issue for the many gays in this forum who have been looked upon as second class citizens for the last 100 years, well actually longer.

So it's kind of hard to say (as you do), "Lets put emotions aside and settle this through discussion."  Maybe thoughtful discussion can come later, but for now it's not possible on a national scale.  The more that gay equality looms as a reality of the future, the more emotional the response becomes from the status quo.  If it were that easy to push a button and settle this cerebrally, your suggestion would have more merit.  But that's not the way humans act. 

Enter the civil courts, which is a democratic attempt to move highly emotional unresolvable arguments toward a less emotional solution.  One thing that does strike me about your argument, is that it is not so much about equality for gays (for or against.  I don't know which), but more about the government having civil courts where these types of problems are addressed.  If that is your argument, it's being sidetracked.  In a way, I see two different arguments taking place at the same time.

[stromboli]

The issue is service. If you have a business that is available to the general public and then after the fact select out certain groups as not eligible for your services, that act by itself is prejudicial. The baker singled out a specific group of people as ineligible despite the fact that in every other sense they should be, and also willing to serve every other group but them; again prejudicial.

[PopeyesPappy]

@ MaryMargaret

First I want to apologies for the Fox news comment. What led me down that path was your comment about special privilege. After going back and rereading your post I realized that you weren’t claiming special privilege but talking about other people that might.

Having said that I still disagree with your general position on this topic. Yes the US is an over litigious society. However I do not believe this was a frivolous lawsuit. An example of a frivolous lawsuit is the guy who sued Anheiser-Busch because he didn’t have any luck with the ladies when drunk on their products which was not how the company depicted the situation in their commercials.

Nor do I believe this type of legal action is making any kind of significant contribution to desensitizing people to the injustice of unequal rights for gays. At least not when compared to the amount of good they are doing. You yourself mentioned that more and more states were recognizing equal rights for gays. That’s true. All over the country so called sanctity of marriage laws are being over turned. They are being overturned because people are bringing suit against them claiming a violation of their rights. The same principle applies to the wedding cake case. For decades now the courts have consistently ruled that businesses may not discriminate based on a number of variables such as race, gender and age. The only way gays are get to get the same type of recognition as those other groups is to keep hauling the people that just don’t get it into court.

[marymargaret]

@ MaryMargaret

First I want to apologies for the Fox news comment. What led me down that path was your comment about special privilege. After going back and rereading your post I realized that you weren’t claiming special privilege but talking about other people that might.

Having said that I still disagree with your general position on this topic. Yes the US is an over litigious society. However I do not believe this was a frivolous lawsuit. An example of a frivolous lawsuit is the guy who sued Anheiser-Busch because he didn’t have any luck with the ladies when drunk on their products which was not how the company depicted the situation in their commercials.

Nor do I believe this type of legal action is making any kind of significant contribution to desensitizing people to the injustice of unequal rights for gays. At least not when compared to the amount of good they are doing. You yourself mentioned that more and more states were recognizing equal rights for gays. That’s true. All over the country so called sanctity of marriage laws are being over turned. They are being overturned because people are bringing suit against them claiming a violation of their rights. The same principle applies to the wedding cake case. For decades now the courts have consistently ruled that businesses may not discriminate based on a number of variables such as race, gender and age. The only way gays are get to get the same type of recognition as those other groups is to keep hauling the people that just don’t get it into court.

Thanks. We all get caught up in the heat of an argument and may misinterpret what others say. I get what you mean about people having to pursue legal action. Sad that it has to be that way but sometimes it does. I just don't like to categorize people- if I see someone treated badly, it doesn't matter to me if they're in a particular group or not- I see a fellow human being. I also make no distinction between a$$holes and bigots- they're kissing cousins as far as I'm concerned, they both can inflict great harm. There are cases of people making up offences on both sides. Remember that case of the lesbian waitress who altered the check to make it look like a religious slur against her? That kind of stuff helps no one.   

Trouble is, extremist on both sides can make things much worse and create ill will where there may have been little or none.   

BTW- I like your avatar. We're looking into a rescue shelter that takes in dogs from all over. We've got senior cats and would eventually get a dog. It breaks my heart to see so many abandoned, unloved fur babies. We've rescued about 15 cats over the years.

[PopeyesPappy]

On assholes and bigots.

All bigots are assholes, but not all assholes are bigots.

No idea where you are located, but I can probably hook you up with a senior greyhound anytime you want one. A word of warning though. They can be addictive.

[marymargaret]

In in the Northeast- I'm older with a touch of arthritis so I need a dog that won't mind. LOL I've met a few greyhounds and they were real sweethearts. I'm hesitant because of my cats, but I do plan on adopting a small to medium sized dog. I'd appreciate any advice you can give me. :)

[SGOS]

The only time I've been around greyhounds, I was at a guy's house who had three of them.  He carefully cautioned me not to try and touch them, or something bad would happen, although I can't remember what it was.  I think he said something about them being high strung, and I'm not sure what that even implied.  I just know that I did not get to know them.  Nor did they take any interest in me.  They looked harmless enough.

[marymargaret]

The only time I've been around greyhounds, I was at a guy's house who had three of them.  He carefully cautioned me not to try and touch them, or something bad would happen, although I can't remember what it was.  I think he said something about them being high strung, and I'm not sure what that even implied.  I just know that I did not get to know them.  Nor did they take any interest in me.  They looked harmless enough.

I've heard about the abuse some of them suffer from the racing industry. The rescues I've met were skiddish and shy. The ones raised as pets were friendly. I don't know anything about the breed, but I'm sad to see what happens to them.

I'm leaning towards a good ol' mixed breed pup. The rescue center is very thorough in their adoption process which is a plus. I'm doing a bit of research to see what breeds would fit our household because I do so want this to be a successful adoption. Any info from dog lovers here would be very helpful. I'll start a separate thread - thanks for your reply. :) 

[SGOS]

I've heard about the abuse some of them suffer from the racing industry. The rescues I've met were skiddish and shy. The ones raised as pets were friendly. I don't know anything about the breed, but I'm sad to see what happens to them.

Yes, yes.  He said that those three had been from the racing industry.  He may have even called them "rescues".  More likely, they had been used up and gotten rid of.

[marymargaret]

Yes, yes.  He said that those three had been from the racing industry.  He may have even called them "rescues".  More likely, they had been used up and gotten rid of.

I've heard some horror stories of what happens to them. Can't even repeat it. :(

[marymargaret]

I have already written the answer of your questions. No, being rude to someone is not equal of the situation we are discussing here. You keep repeating your wishful thinking and still insist on that this is something people can resolve by themselves.

People living out of the first world wish they had these opportunities. I live in a country that is at some aspect a second, in others a third world. The fact that this is a first world problem, doesn't negate its existence as a real problem.  And I don't see USA as a first world country. Yes, may be some parts of it? Netherlands is a first world country. Sweden or Norway is a first world country.  Not USA.  It will be a first world country when these piece of shits learn that they do not have a right to be offended by someone else's sexual preference. And people need to be forced. I know bigotry and bigots VERY WELL.

You cannot deal with this people by talking to them. They do not like gays, transgenders or this and that people having the same rights with them? They can fuck of to some sharia country and live there. They do not deserve the country they live in. Period.

I personally find it ugly the way you see a fundamental problem of a group of people as something very trivial, because you don't live through it and expect them to suck it. Because doesn't matter if you are aware or not with your 'oh people can deal with it themselves' attitude but this is what you are doing.

You don't see this as a real problem and you are giving ridiculous excuses and no solutions while you are supporting the best solution shouldn't be the one taken. Frankly, I don't like your attitude in general and so far with what you came up with I also don't believe you expected support for both sides.  Nobody said the answer for every conflict is always the court. For this issue YES it is the court.

I feel angry about every kind of discrimination. Esp. this one. ALWAYS. Intense for some people? Tough.

Anyway, this conversation is going nowhere, because either you do not get what is the problem or think discrimination is something trivial.

DS- I don't expect to resolve this issue for anyone. Your anger is evident and maybe this issue hits too close to home for you. We don't know each other. I'm not trying to trivialize anyone's problems. I just would like to see people at least try and bridge the gaps that may lead to more understanding and respect. Maybe I'm too metaphysical in my point of view, but I do believe that people can create a positive or negative wave that will affect others. It can't be all one sided. I personally have had to deal with situations where I could chose to make a situation worse to please myself or to reach out and try to change it for the better.

The couple could have said to the baker, we disagree with your position but we understand that this is distressing to you and we won't ask you to violate your personal religious beliefs. The baker could have then offered to recommend someone else, and maybe a discount on their birthday cakes. (He does do them for gays and has gay customers)
He was more upset about breaking rules he's burdened with rather than hating on the couple. The couple could have demonstrated tolerance for someone they didn't agree with. If he had verbally abused them- then yes- go to court. Are you getting what I'm saying? I'm not in a contest of opinions here- just how people can reach out to each other a little more and change the attitude and fears people have about new things. I'll bet that some of the news would present the story in a positive light. Strength isn't always about defeating the enemy- sometimes it's winning them over to a more open way of thinking. 

[Moralnihilist]

On one hand, I agree that businesses can't discriminate based solely on who is fucking who where. On the other hand, as a business owner I have an issue with the courts telling someone how to run their business.