• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Religious freedom" hypothetical

In this situation, was the baker's religious freedom violated?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • No

    Votes: 14 82.4%

  • Total voters
    17

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Hypothetical situation:

A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.

A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.

In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

Feel free to expand on your survey response below.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Any freedom here would be based on the baker's knowledge of what he is truly doing. If he's unaware of what he's actually doing then his freedom has not been abridged.

.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
No, I don't think it was violated. At least not unless that baker somehow thinks of asking whose wedding the cake is for and is lied to or somehow denied his wishes.

While there is hardly any objective measure of what would constitute religious freedom (because religions and pseudo-religions can so easily hold entirely abusive, even contradictory expectations), even very extreme expectations would have no grounds to complain that a cake's buyer is not using it quite in the exact way that the baker assumed without even a request or inquiry having been expressed.

The baker could conceivably learn of the exact use and feel insulted, even demand an apology. That would still be weird and uncalled for, but it unfortunately could be sincere (if abusive). But it takes a remarkably insane pseudo-religious doctrine to actually state that other people have a duty to restrict the use of cakes they bought in good faith without being asked to.
 
In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

AFAIK, most religions tend to have 'if you weren't aware then it's not a sin' type clauses, so techniclly it's probably not a violation of their religious principles.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
AFAIK, most religions tend to have 'if you weren't aware then it's not a sin' type clauses, so techniclly it's probably not a violation of their religious principles.
Don't know much about other religions, but in Christianity ignorance is no excuse. Simply recall all the Christian missionaries who traveled to all parts of the world to tell the unaware that they were sinners and how to get right with the lord.

missionaries-francfriar.jpg

2_-_our_aim_february_1912_0.jpg
 
Last edited:

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Hypothetical situation:

A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.

A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.

In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

Feel free to expand on your survey response below.

I'd supposed it be like purchasing a statue of Jesus created created by a Christian and photographing it in a jar of ****. Once you purchased it, what you do with it is your business. However the Christian might refuse to make the statue in the first place if told the purpose of it.

http://www.thejournal.ie/****-christ-derry-3001417-Sep2016/
 
Don't know much about other religions, but in Christianity ignorance is no excuse. Simply recall all the Christian missionaries who traveled to all parts of the earth to tell the unaware that they were sinners and how to get right with the lord.

Christianity doesn't apply to the heathens, just the Christians... :D
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Hypothetical situation:

A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.

A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.

In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

Feel free to expand on your survey response below.
Obviously for this to work there could not be any message, symbol, or decoration on the cake that violates the bakers religion. So it could not be the cake. The baker would have to say he had a religious objection to the people buying the cake, of eating the cake.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
AFAIK, most religions tend to have 'if you weren't aware then it's not a sin' type clauses, so techniclly it's probably not a violation of their religious principles.
So if they weren't a willing participant, their religious freedom wasn't violated?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Obviously for this to work there could not be any message, symbol, or decoration on the cake that violates the bakers religion.
Right... not at least anything that was known to the baker at the time.

I suppose that if one of the members of the couple had an ambiguous name, they could have lied to the baker ("we want it to say "Robin and James")... but for the purposes of this discussion, it's probably easiest to assume that none of the decoration refers to the couple or their sex or gender. Say it's got a floral theme with no writing and no "married couple" cake topper.

So it could not be the cake. The baker would have to say he had a religious objection to the people buying the cake, of eating the cake.
Or of it appearing on display at a same-sex wedding, or of having the bakery name associated with the event, etc. But yes: assume that it's the sort of cake that would have been completely appropriate at an opposite-sex wedding.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
The bible says nothing about baking a cake, this baker would have a point if he was the one trying to get married to another man. Religious discrimination which poisons this country.
 
So if they weren't a willing participant, their religious freedom wasn't violated?

I'd say so.

If you sold someone a steak knife and they killed someone with it then you aren't morally responsible (unless you sold it with the knowledge that's what it would be used for).
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
I can't say I understand their position that baking cake violates a baker's religious freedom, but I'm not voting yes or no.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Hypothetical situation:
A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.
A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.
In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?
Feel free to expand on your survey response below.

No, it is not violated. His religious freedom. His responsibility. People have to learn to stick to their own business. Don't worry too much about others' business.

If it is a big deal to him, then he should ask identification before accepting the order. Or place a sign "private detective checks if you are not gay".

If I believe it is really a big deal for God and me then I offer it to God AND I ask God to give me a heads-up if people try to fool me. Then it's in God's hands. God's business so to say. 1 out of 10 [10%] God gives a heads-up. So I have concluded that God is quite cool about most things. Those rules people follow is mostly in the mind of the people, not necessarily in God's emergency "to do list". Which makes kind of sense. Big universe, 1 Boss for the big picture. Not for all minor details.
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I'd say so.

If you sold someone a steak knife and they killed someone with it then you aren't morally responsible (unless you sold it with the knowledge that's what it would be used for).
I don't see religious freedom as a question of moral responsibility; I see it as a matter of protections and rights.

As an extreme example: burning down a church would certainly be an infringement of religious freedom, for instance.
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
Hypothetical situation:

A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.

A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.

In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

Feel free to expand on your survey response below.

The baker is a whining snow flake trying to promote his version of political correctness. If you have a public business and you don't like who comes through your door then don't be in business.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
I'd back up a step. Regardless of the actual results of the situation, I think people are trying to extend religious freedom past its intended boundaries. I don't believe anyone should be able to use the "religious freedom" argument as a way to override existing secular laws. So - for example - for many reasons I disagree with the Hobby Lobby decision from a few years back.

To me, religious freedom means you can practice your faith in private or in your place of worship, but you cannot inflict it on the public.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
These people need to stop whining about the damn cakes. Their tender sensibilities of "religious freedom" are not being infringed upon by baking a cake. If they're really so concerned about the type of wedding that's going to be happening, then they need to stop making cakes period because chances are they're going to disagree with something from someone who they bake a cake for.

Cakes aren't religious.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Hypothetical situation:

A wedding cake baker is known to refuse to make cakes for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.

A same-sex couple wants a cake for their wedding. One member of the couple and a friend of the opposite sex pose as an opposite-sex couple and order a cake from the baker. The baker's cake is displayed and served at the wedding, though the couple doesn't tell the guests where they got it.

In your understanding of "religious freedom," has the religious freedom of the baker been violated?

Feel free to expand on your survey response below.
Hypothetically, it hasn't been violated. Biblically, it hasn't been violated either.

You posed an excellent thought, "Who'd have thought this frank talk about religion would result in heated debate?" - especially a hypothetical one? :D
 
Top