Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2

[Silver]

Theists just want their cake and to eat it too.

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't see how his belief being religious is even relevant here at all, except as attempted shielding from the law.

That's the rub..it's not...and it isn't a shield from the law.  That's what the ADF resents so deeply.  That not only is christian dominionism not the law of the land, it can't even sheild a good high stepping dominionist -from- the law of the land.  

Any and every victory however tiny..though, gets them closer to that goal.  So even if they can't get a court to agree that he has any such exemptions..if they can get a court to slap a lower court on the wrist for being very, very mean to him (lol)... it seems like a win.  The ADF has allies on the bench and in congress who are entirely too eager to deliver when it comes to saving face, even if they don't quite have the chutzpah to deliver us unto Gilead just yet.

[John V]

Well we don't really know all the circumstances, but I would wager a guess that they would bake an identical cake to the one described if it were for a Christian baptism.

If that's true that means their objection is to the person, which really isn't any of the baker's business. I'd be curious though if they ask what the cake is for, or if that information was volunteered.

Either way, I was undecided on this before, because like you I don't think artists or really anyone should be forced to produce anything they don't want to. But that doesn't really seem to be what's going on.

The cake order described doesn't sound that special. It doesn't sound like a gay cake or a trans cake. Its not being asked to have two brides on it. It just sounds like a run of the mill cake that could be used to celebrate anything.

If they would make that same cake for a different person or a different celebration. It's just plain and simple bigotry. It's also strikes me that it's not really any of the baker's business what the cakes are used for.

You should read the material before commenting. The person went out of their way to tell the bakery what the cake was for. And, on the day that the first case was decided. This was intentional. I suppose Divine thinks it was done out of love...

[possibletarian]

You should read the material before commenting. The person went out of their way to tell the bakery what the cake was for. And, on the day that the first case was decided. This was intentional. I suppose Divine thinks it was done out of love...

So what ? Why should it being intentional or not make a difference, in fact it's normal to tell a baker of any kind if you want a cake made to specifications your reasoning behind it.  This is a fight for legal rights, I have no doubt that some black people intentionally asked for certain services and rights to stir the debate.

That's how you fight bigotry, and that's how you fight for your rights you cannot unintentionally fight for your rights.

[Catholic_Lady]

I can see both sides of the argument, and have usually leaned towards the right of a bakery owner to not create a cake for an event that he/she does not morally agree with.

This is an extreme example, but the way I see it is, if I owned my own bakery and someone came in and asked me to make a cake with a swastika on it and write "White Supremacy" on it, for some sort of rally they were having, I would absolutely refuse. And I would hope I wouldn't be legally forced by the government to do it.

I'm willing to discuss this and have my mind changed, though, if someone brings up a good point.

[Silver]

I can see both sides of the argument, and have usually leaned towards the right of a bakery owner to not create a cake for an event that he/she does not morally agree with.

This is an extreme example, but the way I see it is, if I owned my own bakery and someone came in and asked me to make a cake with a swastika on it and write "White Supremacy" on it, for some sort of rally they were having, I would absolutely refuse. And I would hope I wouldn't be legally forced by the government to do it.

I'm willing to discuss this and have my mind changed, though, if someone brings up a good point.

That's the difference.

You're not supporting "Hitler".

How is that relational to a baker refusing a cake for a gay couple?

Are you stating with what you have posted that the both are comparable?

[possibletarian]

I can see both sides of the argument, and have usually leaned towards the right of a bakery owner to not create a cake for an event that he/she does not morally agree with.

This is an extreme example, but the way I see it is, if I owned my own bakery and someone came in and asked me to make a cake with a swastika on it and write "White Supremacy" on it, for some sort of rally they were having, I would absolutely refuse. And I would hope I wouldn't be legally forced by the government to do it.

I'm willing to discuss this and have my mind changed, though, if someone brings up a good point.

Of course you would refuse, ones about the right to oppress and degrade, and the other a loathed symbol of oppression after the Nazis used it.

A birthday cake is about celebrating someone's individuality, life and freedom.

[Catholic_Lady]

I can see both sides of the argument, and have usually leaned towards the right of a bakery owner to not create a cake for an event that he/she does not morally agree with.

This is an extreme example, but the way I see it is, if I owned my own bakery and someone came in and asked me to make a cake with a swastika on it and write "White Supremacy" on it, for some sort of rally they were having, I would absolutely refuse. And I would hope I wouldn't be legally forced by the government to do it.

I'm willing to discuss this and have my mind changed, though, if someone brings up a good point.

That's the difference.

You're not supporting "Hitler".

How is that relational to a baker refusing a cake for a gay couple?

Are you stating with what you have posted that the both are comparable?

That's the thing though. It doesn't matter what the cause is. As far as the law is concerned, either a Baker is allowed to refuse to bake a cake for an event he is morally opposed to, or he isn't.

[Divinity]

I love how Christians always compare Transgender people to White Supremacy.

I wonder how many of those Christians would be okay if they were the ones being refused service because they're Christian. Oh right.. .they already bitch constantly about businesses not saying "merry Christmas" so we can tell how they'll react.

Personally, I think being a Christian is more comparable to being a White Supremacist than being transgender is. Especially since being a Christian is a choice, and a lot of Christians are white supremacists.

[Silver]

That's the thing though. It doesn't matter what the cause is. As far as the law is concerned, either a Baker is allowed to refuse to bake a cake for an event he is morally opposed to, or he isn't.

The law is not based around "whatever", but instead on deeper meanings such as discrimination.

The baker should be entitled to bake. That alone is the point. When the baker includes politics, he includes his prejudice.