Can the government make me decorate a cake?

[Notanumber]

The government maintains that, at least in this case, Colorado’s public-accommodations law triggers that more searching review because it compels Phillips to create custom cakes for same-sex marriage celebrations, which (depending on the cake) can be either actual speech or, at a minimum, the kind of expressive conduct that conveys a message to others, without allowing Phillips to make clear that he does not share his customers’ viewpoints on same-sex marriage. Moreover, Colorado does not have a sufficiently strong interest to justify infringing on Phillips’ religious beliefs, particularly because same-sex marriage was not even legal in Colorado when Craig and Mullins asked Phillips to create a cake. Indeed, the federal government emphasizes, this is a far cry from the kind of discrimination that the public-accommodations law was designed to combat: The Supreme Court itself has acknowledged that “opposition to same-sex marriage ‘long has been held—and continues to be held—in good faith by reasonable and sincere people.’”

Wedding cakes v. religious beliefs?: In Plain English - SCOTUSblog

I doubt very much that the bakery would have refused to sell the couple an off the shelf wedding cake.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

No doubt public accommodation laws fill a need, but I believe that, like all things that elicit an emotional response in people, things can be taken too far.

You can judge by the reaction how many people thought that the baker had gone too far.

The bakery incident is a good example. It was obviously intended to give ammunition to the gay lobby.

You have no such knowledge. For all we know, he was trying to hit the jackpot like the bakers in the past who got fat off of some kind of Christian crowd sourcing collection for them. Or maybe he's hoping that his case will go to the Supreme Court.

It is amazing to me how low public acceptance can go when legal buttons are pushed and penalties can threaten a kind and loving man with ruin because he has principles by which he chooses to live in a free country.

What kind and loving man? I saw a bigot. If his business is ruined, he ruined it. He surely knows the rules by now. Take that position, and face legal and social consequences. He made his choice.

No, it is one powerful lobby group with a specific agenda trying to steal what is left of things that belong to God.

I see it as a powerful religious bloc trying to steal the dignity that the same sex couple is entitled to. What about the things that belong to them?

The baker in this story wasn't going to allow these customers to steal what is left of his Christian values.

Then he should be content with his choice and the outcome. He was free to refuse and the community was free to boycott and decry him. You mentioned a free country earlier. Hopefully, you didn't mean for Christians only.

He is fighting for his right not to surrender to something that is against everything he believes in.

The United States doesn't recognize any such right. It recognizes the right of individuals of certain specified classes to not be discriminated against. The baker forced two of them to fight for their rights.

I think that these matters are very good for those hoping for a more irreligious America. They illustrate very nicely the disconnect between what a certain type of Christian calls love and following the Golden Rule, and what is actually being said and done. These actions are not loving, and they are a gross violation of the Golden Rule.

As always, it's the unbelievers leading the charge for fairness, tolerance, equality, and justice, while the church continues to try to impose its irrational, hateful, destructive agenda against one of its favorite groups to scapegoat and persecute. That's what many people are seeing, and it drives them from religion.

Go find a baker who is happy to make you a cake.

I'm sure that they did. They also found a lawyer happy to take their case.

Put a rainbow ribbon in your window and gays will flock to your bakery. If there is no ribbon...don't ask for they do not wish to provide.

And make sure to put up a yellow star in your window if your religious sensibilities don't forbid you from serving Jews.

No one is offended and no one one needs to be sued for having scruples.

If he is sued, he will be sued for violating the legal rights of others.

Sorry, but it seems like many if not most of us have no desire to accommodate religious bigotry. The religious community will adapt. Those unwilling to will be selected against and fall out of the business, those that do will prosper, and Christians considering going into the baking business will be the ones willing to not discriminate illegally.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I am not a Christian but from what I have seen and heard Christians are more likely to feel obliged to tell the truth when defending their faith.

You haven't spent much time on Christian apologetics sites, have you?

This baker told the truth and he and his family are been punished for his honesty.

This baker discriminated illegally and is being held accountable.

This seems to be more important now than ever, with the American president failing to condemn white supremacists driving cars into crowds, appearing to have committed multiple crimes himself that nobody expects will be prosecuted at the federal level, pardoning scofflaw sheriffs, and indicating a desire to pardon himself and his co-conspirators.

 

[Nous]

This baker told the truth and he and his family are been punished for his honesty.

False. He was convicted of illegally discriminating in violation of Colorado's public accommodations law.

 

[Nous]

You haven't heard a word I've said.

I've read your posts. The problem is that they are irrelevant to the topic. The Bible verses that you quote and interpret in a homophobic way are irrelevant to the law in both the US and Australia. Moreover, as already pointed out numerous times, the Bible verses you've quoted obviously do not require adherents to legally or illegally discriminate against loving, committed, responsible same-sex couples while catering to the desires of criminals.

"Enlightened people" you say? Let me just "enlighten" you......

enlightened
ɪnˈlʌɪt(ə)nd/
adjective

1. having or showing a rational, modern, and well-informed outlook.
   "the more enlightened employers offer better terms"
   synonyms: informed, aware, educated, knowledgeable, learned, wise, literate, intellectual, tutored, illuminated, apprised;
   • spiritually aware.
     "we become enlightened in our relationship with God

This is exactly why enlightened people do not desire and do not express the irrational animus toward loving, committed, responsible same-sex couples that you do.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Bakers aren't being forced to bake anything - they chose to do so by going into the baking business. Baking, unless I'm mistaken, is what bakers do.

Hiding discrimination behind a veil doesn't stop one from being discriminatory.
No amount of special pleading will make this Religious Freedom crap any less ridiculous.

If you don't want to bake cakes for the public, don't operate in the public sector.

 

[Nous]

The government maintains that, at least in this case, Colorado’s public-accommodations law triggers that more searching review because it compels Phillips to create custom cakes for same-sex marriage celebrations, which (depending on the cake) can be either actual speech or, at a minimum, the kind of expressive conduct that conveys a message to others, without allowing Phillips to make clear that he does not share his customers’ viewpoints on same-sex marriage. Moreover, Colorado does not have a sufficiently strong interest to justify infringing on Phillips’ religious beliefs, particularly because same-sex marriage was not even legal in Colorado when Craig and Mullins asked Phillips to create a cake. Indeed, the federal government emphasizes, this is a far cry from the kind of discrimination that the public-accommodations law was designed to combat: The Supreme Court itself has acknowledged that “opposition to same-sex marriage ‘long has been held—and continues to be held—in good faith by reasonable and sincere people.’”

Wedding cakes v. religious beliefs?: In Plain English - SCOTUSblog

I doubt very much that the bakery would have refused to sell the couple an off the shelf wedding cake.

If you were to read the government's brief, you would see that it's argument depends on the ridiculous idea that by baking and selling a cake to Craig and Mullins, Phillips would have been participating in the wedding ceremony and in the couple's relationship. The government was unable to cite any case law--and there is no case law--indicating that a vendor that provides and sells a product is a participant in an event that he isn't invited to and doesn't attend, much less is he a participant in any married couple's relationship. The cake itself did not attend the wedding ceremony in Massachusetts.

 

[Deeje]

I am I the only one who notices the equally sad bigotry expressed towards the baker by many of the posters here? This is the bigots calling the other guys "bigots"! You have become what you say you want to get rid of.

The blinkers are firmly on and there is no removing them apparently, no matter how the situation can be remedied with little or no animosity on either side....y'all want to make it the most important issue in the world by doing to others what you believe they did to gays. Obviously, there is some kind of "justice" you see in this? Is vengeance making you feel good?

You act as if "the law" is "God"...it may be your god but its not mine. It may wield a big stick, but I believe that God's is bigger.

I will uphold any law of the land as long as it doesn't contravene the law of God. No government law will force me to violate my conscience. If they forced me into conscription to fight and kill in a war, I would not obey them. It is against my Christian conscience to even train to kill a human being for any reason. I cannot be a hypocrite and ignore the laws of God to accommodate the laws of man as if they were somehow superior? The laws of many lands reflect the Biblical laws and have for centuries. This is because a certain standard of decency was upheld by the majority......these values are slipping away and is the world better off for it? I don't think so.

Spiritually, morally and fraternally we can see the impact of these issues eroding family values, ignoring moral values and creating a spiritual vacuum for an overwhelming number of people.

The 'mob mentality' will never work on a true Christian because he does not take his values from a world in utter moral chaos. True Christianity is an oasis amidst the "freedom to do as you wish" so prevalent in today's society. I much prefer living in the order of knowing where my boundaries are and who created them for my benefit. I will step outside of them for no one...and no law of man can make me.

It seems that no matter how hard one tries to talk some balanced sense into this emotive topic, most of you cannot see past the end of your stilted noses as to where this will take us.

"Freedom" is an illusion....a managed 'perception' designed to lead you down a certain path.....but you will not like what is at the end of it.

 

[Nous]

I am I the only one who notices the equally sad bigotry expressed towards the baker by the many of the posters here?

There is no bigotry toward bakers here. Phillips violated the law by illegally discriminating against a same-sex couple. All criticism of him has been due to that or the homophobic bigotry that motivated it.

 

[Deeje]

I think that these matters are very good for those hoping for a more irreligious America.

BINGO! Be careful what you wish for......

 

[Deeje]

There is no bigotry toward bakers here. Phillips violated the law by illegally discriminating against a same-sex couple. All criticism of him has been due to that or the homophobic bigotry that motivated it.

Whatever you reckon.....no point in continuing.....

 

[Nous]

Whatever you reckon.....no point in continuing.

That's correct. You don't have any valid arguments are true claims on which to defend violating public accommodations laws. The desire of homophobes to discriminate against same-sex couples is no different in kind than the desire of racist to discriminated against African Americans in the early-to-mid 20th century. It's same song, different verse. And it's on the wrong side of history.

 

[columbus]

I am I the only one who notices the equally sad bigotry expressed towards the baker by the many of the posters here? This is the bigots calling the other guys "bigots"! You have become what you say you want to get rid of.

I don't often agree with you, as you may have noticed. But I do here.

I wouldn't want something as as personal as a wedding cake crafted by someone forced at lawsuit point to do it.

I think this whole issue is a ridiculous extreme of the culture of victimhood and entitlement. It makes me want to seriously redo antidiscrimination statutes to only include essential or government services.
Like a building permit for JWs.
Tom

 

[Deeje]

That's correct. You don't have any valid arguments are true claims on which to defend violating public accommodations laws. The desire of homophobes to discriminate against same-sex couples is no different in kind than the desire of racist to discriminated against African Americans in the early-to-mid 20th century. It's same song, different verse. And it's on the wrong side of history.

Your record is broken......your views are hateful, divisive and non-constructive. They just add to the problem.....forcing people to do things against their will is dictatorship...that is not a useful solution. Democracy means caring for the rights of all, so isn't it better to balance things rather than wield a big legal stick to force your view on others? Are we not grown up enough to make adult decisions about how to live our own lives? There is middle ground here, but all I see are baseless accusations (in the case being discussed) and no desire for a peaceful solution.....it is indeed just a perpetuation of the whole "victim" / "entitlement" mentality as Columbus has mentioned.
Its time to grow up and learn how to live and let live.

There is no need for any of this.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Your record is broken......your views are hateful, divisive and non-constructive. They just add to the problem

The problem is bigoted Christians.

.forcing people to do things against their will is dictatorship

Nobody is forced to be a bigoted baker. That's a choice.

Democracy means caring for the rights of all

Democracy means rule by the people. The people want Christians to be decent and loving, or at least to pretend and fake it. What's it going to take to get that? How many need to be prosecuted?

Its time to grow up and learn how to live and let live

Exactly.

 

[Deeje]

The problem is bigoted Christians.

I agree that bigotry has no place in any situation. There is no reason to tell other people how to live if they want to pursue the lifestyle of their choice. I would never condone hatred or bigotry towards anyone....but neither would I compromise on my own dearly held beliefs to please other humans who were committing what I believe are gross wrongs. You have the right to your own views, but so do I.

Those "Christians" who walk around with placards, verbally attacking gays and calling them horrible names, did not get that instruction from Jesus. We are to treat all people with respect. But it doesn't mean that we let anyone trample on our right to hold an opinion based on the application of our sincerely held Biblical beliefs.

Nobody is forced to be a bigoted baker. That's a choice.

Mr Phillips is not a bigot. If you watch the videos posted on this thread, you will see that he is a reasonable and fair man who serves gay people in his shop. Its not like he's posted a sign in his window saying that gays are not welcome. The "couple" involved obviously wanted to make an issue of this rather than to just take their business elsewhere. As I see it, there are those being equally bigoted in targeting Christians for their scriptural position on SSM.

Mr Phillips does not refuse to serve gay customers....he just refused to bake and decorate a gay wedding cake because his conscience would not let him. In a democracy, everyone's rights should be taken into consideration. That means that equal rights should prevail, if "all men are created equal" under your constitution.....unless you want to live under a dictatorship?
This issue is the tip of a much bigger iceberg, but you won't know where this is heading until it starts to affect you in ways you never imagined.

Democracy means rule by the people. The people want Christians to be decent and loving, or at least to pretend and fake it.

Sorry, but "faking it" is the same as lying. It is also being hypocritical which we know Christ condemned. No one should be forced to violate a sincerely held conscientious belief. We can each respect the other person's right to hold an opposing view without the threat of legal action. What is with this suing over every little thing?

What's it going to take to get that? How many need to be prosecuted?

You think you can flog the conscience out of people by punishing them? You think prosecution will make someone submit to something that they find completely offensive? I'm sorry, but my right to be offended by you is equally as important as your right to be offended by me. Why is your offense more important than mine? Can't we agree to disagree?

The "adult" thing to do is to live and let live...which should apply equally to both parties. What's it going to take for you guys to understand this? There needs to be a balanced, mature attitude to this situation and throwing the book at someone is not going to solve the problem. It just creates more animosity. Bullies should never be allowed to win....on either side.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am I the only one who notices the equally sad bigotry expressed towards the baker by many of the posters here? This is the bigots calling the other guys "bigots"! You have become what you say you want to get rid of.

I've said it before: nobody is the villain of their own story. It's a rare bigot who recognizes their own bigotry.

The blinkers are firmly on and there is no removing them apparently, no matter how the situation can be remedied with little or no animosity on either side....y'all want to make it the most important issue in the world by doing to others what you believe they did to gays. Obviously, there is some kind of "justice" you see in this? Is vengeance making you feel good?

Public accommodation laws are very important.

I think we should remember what's happening here: public accommodation laws protect people's access to all sorts of goods and services that are much more critical to life than a wedding cake. The wedding cake examples are used by defenders of bigotry in order to cast public accommodation laws in a certain light: they know that if we were talking about, say, a racist landlord that decided to throw one of his tenants out on the street when he found out he was in an interracial relationship, the landlord and his defenders would be cast in a very negative light.

These wedding cake cases are the ones where the bigots think they come off as sympathetic as possible, so they focus on them... even though the principles that they argue for the wedding cake baker would also imply that the gay tenant should be thrown out of his home at the whim of a homophobic landlord.

So yes: this issue is very important.

The 'mob mentality' will never work on a true Christian because he does not take his values from a world in utter moral chaos.

I think you're mischaracterizing the situation here. Christians are the mob.

In the United States, every branch of government is dominated by Christians. Christians form the largest voting bloc in the country. Christians have the power. For the most part, the people who passed these laws you disagree with were Christians. For the most part, the people who enforce them are Christians. For the most part, the legal system that hears the appeals in these cases is Christian.

In the US, no law affecting Christians gets passed without the consent of the Christian establishment.

What's happening here is that the most powerful group in the country has been told - mostly by its own members - not to use their power to harass and persecute vulnerable people quite as much as they used to.

You are not the martyr here. The baker is not the martyr here. The call - mostly from other Christians - not to persecute others is not persecution of Christianity.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I am I the only one who notices the equally sad bigotry expressed towards the baker by many of the posters here? This is the bigots calling the other guys "bigots"! You have become what you say you want to get rid of.

There are certain ills that simply will not be tolerated, even in the most tolerant of societies.
It's not a contradiction to stamp out racially or sexually motivated bigotry in the name of inclusion. I'm very sorry that it makes life more difficult for racial or sexually motivated bigots, but there's no place for that type of behavior in an inclusive world.

Would your argument here be any good if the subject was racial segregation? Would you side with the religiously motivated concerns of the people who Biblically believed that "blacks" were inferior and should drink from separate fountains, live in separate housing, swim in separate pools, and attend separate schools? Would you argue that the problem actually rests with desegregationists for being bigoted against the bigots? Is that the tact you would take?

Your record is broken......your views are hateful, divisive and non-constructive. They just add to the problem.....forcing people to do things against their will is dictatorship...that is not a useful solution.

Let's keep that previous ball rolling, and see if your argument is any good:

The South was (and is) filled with hundreds of thousands of people who believed that the Bible not only justified their historical slavery, but also supported their segregated society. Whether or not you agree with their interpretation is beside the point. They held genuine religious conviction which told them that they could not, and should not, serve "the coloreds" because they were inferior to them. In the vein of Democracy, they had State laws which made this separation official.

Would you seriously argue that the real problem in this situation was the hateful, divisive, non-constructive, and dictatorial views of those arguing for the abolishment of segregation? Was the problem with the Civil Rights movement one of government overreach, and not human decency?
Is forcing a racist soda pop stand owner to serve black people the biggest issue with this situation?

The scenarios are almost exactly the same, only there are fewer openly racist store owners today. This baker doesn't want to serve someone because he doesn't like them. He's attempting to justify that dislike with a few minor Biblical passages. And then people like you are defending that stance as if it were legitimate and worthy of defense... as if that behavior should not only be allowed but protected. It's absurd.

No one has ever forced a baker to bake a cake... The only thing that this baker is being required to do, if he wishes to serve the public, is to serve the public fairly and equitably. If he cannot do that, then he should not serve the public.

Its time to grow up and learn how to live and let live.

There is no need for any of this.

You're absolutely correct!
Like those who had to get over their hatred of black people and do unimaginable things like treat them with fairness and decency, it's time for bigoted cake shop owners to grow up, and learn to live and let live. If a Black, Muslim, Gay Samaritan walked into his cake shop and asked for a cake for his polygamous marriage, he should bake it. There is no need for any of this.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A question for those who think that decorating a cake is speech: should the recipient of this cake be able to sue the baker for libel (assuming the allegation on the cake is false)?

 

[icehorse]

The 'mob mentality' will never work on a true Christian because he does not take his values from a world in utter moral chaos. True Christianity is an oasis amidst the "freedom to do as you wish" so prevalent in today's society.

I'm not advocating for the mob. That said, what are the bastions of "true Christianity" you are referring to?