Atheists and Cakes

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Heres a question for you:

Why do so many atheists  want to force Christian bakers to bake cakes for gay couples?

They don't approve of the lifestyle and deem it immoral. I fully believe that is their right.

Why must a devout Christian have to bake a cake to celebrate something he or she does not believe in?

Please tell me.

I understand that the Resolute Desk in the US Whitehouse is made of wood from the HMS Resolute.

Are you also made of wood?

Boru

[Angrboda]

Lots of atheists like to bother people and pretend to be victims of everything.  Not all though.  Of course you will get the ones who will prance into a bakery with video recording on their smart phone because they know what's about to happen.  Then you get an edited version of it on YouTube and Facebook that shows conveniently skips past the part of them hassling the owners of the business.

If an atheist didn't want me to bake a cake, I would just go to a different bakery.  There's always someone who will take your money and I would rather have them baking my cake instead of a person with some sort of bias about it.  I mean, why the heck would anybody want someone making their food that had issue with it?  That would be about the last person I would want making anything for me that I was about to consume.

The thing with gays though is that most don't stir up nonsense like that.  They're just people with a different outlook on life, and a lot of it is kept personal.  I used to have a job with several coworkers that were from the LGBT community.  Their sexual orientation rarely even came up in conversation.  If it did, it was typically through light-hearted conversation without looking for any type of approval, and nobody was looking to make an issue out of it.  Just smile and MYOB.

The age old defense of privilege and prejudice. "They can just go somewhere else. To another baker, another state, another country, another planet. I got mine."

---

We have a Constitution and an international covenant that guarantees us the right of self-determination.  If someone tries to tell me I must violate myself on that basis, they can go fetch a stick.

I'd like to see where any right to self-determination as you interpret it here is spelled out in any international covenant. Sounds like something you just pulled from your ass.

---

Heres a question for you:

Why do so many atheists  want to force Christian bakers to bake cakes for gay couples?

They don't approve of the lifestyle and deem it immoral. I fully believe that is their right.

Why must a devout Christian have to bake a cake to celebrate something he or she does not believe in?

Please tell me.

So I have two lawyer parents, and I’ll speak as they would.

There are two types of products, commodity products where everyone gets the same product and creative products. A commodity product is something like serving everyone who comes into your restaurant, or selling a pair of jeans to anyone who comes into your store. By law you cannot deny a commodity product to a person. It gets a bit more complicated, involving protected classes and compliance with conduct rules, but for the sake of this point if you sell an item you must sell to anyone who wants to buy it.

A creative product is a bit different. This is generally things like a graphic designer or a sculptor. You can’t compel a sculptor to make something they don’t want to, and you can’t force a graphic designer to make something they find offensive.

The dispute is over whether or not a cake is a commodity or a creative product. But the consensus is that pre-made cakes are a commodity. It is also that most common form cakes are also commodities. If you have a pre-made wedding cake for sale, that is a commodity and you have to sell it to anyone. If you make plain birthday cakes for one group you have to sell those cakes to anyone who comes in.

The legal dispute is if custom wedding cakes are creative or commodity products. And I dunno. A cake that is formula or pre-made is a commodity, and you have to sell it to anyone. But a custom cake is in a bit of a legal grey area. But I think that allowing discrimination of one group by a for profit business is a bad precedent.

The court has so far demurred on articulating a position on whether a free speech claim is at issue. If memory serves, even the majority opinion in Masterpiece backed away from that argument. But it's also important to note that a free speech exemption and a religious exemption are two different things.

---

That’s why this is a legal grey area. How much was the baker responsible for? How much is just a form order for his clients? Where do we draw that line? If the baker has a book of cakes he makes, those are commodity products and he has to make them for anyone. And if a customer says ‘I want a three tiered devils food cake with chocolate buttercream frosting and piping along the tiers and frosting roses with tiers of diameters 18”, 14”, and 10”’ is that a custom creation or has the customer asked for a series of commodity products? I would argue in this case the cake would be a commodity and the baker would have to sell to them.

But what if the customer leaves it to the baker? Is that a commodity? Is it a creative product? If you rely upon their artistic knowledge I would argue that is a creative product. But if you come in and are very specific and only rely on the bakers time then I would argue that is a commodity.

Since Phillips never got to the stage of a design such that he could have been making a design decision, in Masterpiece 1, the issue of commodity or not does not appear to clearly arise. I haven't followed what happened in the second Masterpiece case, but from memory, he was asked to bake a blue and pink cake. If baking a blue and pink cake is an example of protected artistic speech, there seems no end of the excuses one could use to escape the burden of these laws.

---

Nope, you're making up more nonsense.  Also, in June 2018, our Supreme Court ruled in favor of the baker.

Argument from authority, does that mean you are out of (your own) arguments now?

P.S.: Thx for reminding me why i am glad not to live in the US.
Note: I agree with the commodity/creative argument. However not with people flat out discriminating against minorites, and certianly not because some internet idiot doesnt know shit about biology.

Hint: Max doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about here and is just demonstrating why many people here consider him a dumbass.

---

That's just what those elitist cake snobs say, Nata.  If we open the door for one asshole..we can't really complain when a horde of them pile the entrance.

That's why our courts keep punting this one.

Proof?  Or just more tears as per your usual grumbling?  One minute crying about the law, then "boo hoo" when the highest country in our nation disagrees with your nonsense and affirms what is law.

The highest "country" in our "nation" ? Are you by any chance related to Trump? Covfefe! I say this is a smocking gun that proves that you're a moron.

---

Easy for you to say that.

Should be easy for anybody to say that.  One thing I assure you that is true in life.  There will always be someone happy to take your money.

Really Max? Are you really this ignorant?

[Natachan]

It is true that the issue of commodity vs creative product was not discussed. The court didn’t rule on that in the first case, and the opinions were split on the issue (favoring the idea that this was not protected expression, but that a cake was a commodity. But as the opinions were not part of the ruling that is not relevant). The second case is set to be heard in January. And to me that DEFINITELY sounds like a case of a commodity good that he would be required to sell.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Thanks for silently admitting you like wearing pink Hello Kitty dresses.

Ok, let's get one thing clear - nobody LIKES wearing pink Hello Kitty dresses.  We only do that to get admitted to a better class of bakery.

Boru

[no one]

Isn't it just precious when people who have never faced any kind of injustice, tell others just how easy it is to overcome?

[Amarok]

Heres a question for you:

Why do so many atheists  want to force Christian bakers to bake cakes for gay couples?

They don't approve of the lifestyle and deem it immoral. I fully believe that is their right.

Why must a devout Christian have to bake a cake to celebrate something he or she does not believe in?

Please tell me.

Because you don't have the right to deny service to people based on your bronze age superstitions . Your business isn't a church .

---

And nope it doesn't matter if it's making a specific cake or not . If you willing to do the same event for straight couple or the same service your discriminating if you'll do the contrary for a gay couple .

[Cod]

Just been thinking (no it didn't hurt)… I find Christianity offensive and not particularly moral so if I were a baker and a Christian couple came into Cods bakery and I refused to bake them a cake, would that be acceptable?
If not, why not Christians?

I would of course go ahead and bake the cake, not just because I'm being paid to do so but also because I've always wanted to make a cake with a symbolic meaning.

After all that's what cakes are really about.

[LastPoet]

If anything, it's lack of professionalism. One is there to make cakes the best one can. The motif, well its the usual sexual hangups of abrahamic religions.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Heres a question for you:

Why do so many atheists  want to force Christian bakers to bake cakes for gay couples?

They don't approve of the lifestyle and deem it immoral. I fully believe that is their right.

Why must a devout Christian have to bake a cake to celebrate something he or she does not believe in?

Please tell me.

Because you don't have the right to deny service to people based on your bronze age superstitions . Your business isn't a church .

---

And nope it doesn't matter if it's making a specific cake or not . If you willing to do the same event for straight couple or the same service your discriminating if you'll do the contrary for a gay couple .

In a recorded vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court ruled differently.  The bakery was vindicated and there's no possible legal recourse against the bakery in that case.  Next.

[Cod]

Because you don't have the right to deny service to people based on your bronze age superstitions . Your business isn't a church .

---

And nope it doesn't matter if it's making a specific cake or not . If you willing to do the same event for straight couple or the same service your discriminating if you'll do the contrary for a gay couple .

In a recorded vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court ruled differently.  The bakery was vindicated and there's no possible legal recourse against the bakery in that case.  Next.

Yeah but... Baker, people who are judges, fundamental Christians... Cunts or what?