Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 1, 2025, 6:27 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Colorado Baker
RE: Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Colorado Baker
(June 8, 2018 at 12:19 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
(June 8, 2018 at 12:14 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Not a silly question, I said it before and I will say it again, cakes don't have sexual orientation, they are cakes.

And dresses don’t have a political stance.

If it were illegal to discriminate against someone for being a republican then I'd see your point, but it's not. Political opinions aren't within the realm of a protected class.  Homosexuality, in Colorado, is a protected class.

(June 8, 2018 at 12:32 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: You might want to read Justice Gorsuch's concurring opinion on that matter.

See here.

Thanks.

(June 8, 2018 at 12:39 pm)johan Wrote: How does effect a person's decorating ability? It obviously doesn't effect a person's ability one bit. The issue is should a person be legally required to use their ability to create a cake to be used for a function or purpose which they personally don't agree with.

No one here would argue that a baker has every right to refuse to bake a cake for a NAMBLA recruiting event. But when the event is a gay wedding, people feel differently. Should that be the law?

It already is the law in many states.  Homosexuals are named as a protected class in many states who cannot be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation.  The difference between a NAMBLA recruiting cake and a gay wedding cake is that NAMBLA isn't protected from being discriminated against by law.  They have the first amendment right to assemble and advocate for their views but they don't have legal protections from other people's first amendment rights to disagree with their views and refuse them service.

In the cake case, the baker has the first amendment right to disagree with gay marriage but doesn't have the legal right under Colorado anti-discrimination laws to refuse to serve gay customers or gay events.

I don't see how this case would be substantially different from a (admittedly hypothetical (now)) situation where a Mormon baker refuses a cake to an African American couple because they honestly and sincerely believe that people of African decent are cursed as decedents of Ham and thus have a religious basis for their discrimination against African Americans.

Furthermore, I think that the baker is committing systematic discrimination against a protected class because they state that they are unwilling to bake certain other kinds of cakes for any customers (Halloween cakes, adult themed cakes, etc.) but will provide wedding cakes to heterosexual couples or for heterosexual weddings.

Quote:A more interesting question is this. Suppose when the gay couple approached this baker he had instead told them that he'd be willing to bake them a wedding cake but since he didn't personally agree with gay marriage, he did not expect that the resulting cake would be his best work. IOW, I'll make it for you and sell it to you, but I won't do a very good job and you're probably not going to like it. Still illegal then?

That is an interesting question.  I suppose if this baker is proven to consistently provide substandard cakes to gay customers (and by substandard I mean with respect to comparable cakes made for straight customers) then I think a legal case for discrimination could be made.

Would it not be similar to a baker who consistently provides substandard cakes to African Americans?
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Colorado Baker - by Clueless Morgan - June 11, 2018 at 11:11 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  HIV drug mandate violates religious freedom, judge rules zebo-the-fat 6 1467 September 9, 2022 at 6:12 pm
Last Post: Divinity
  Leaked Supreme Court Decision signals majority set to overturn Roe v. Wade Cecelia 234 32012 June 7, 2022 at 11:58 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Colorado shooting, 5 dead. brewer 0 464 December 28, 2021 at 8:11 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Supreme Court To Take Up Right to Carry Firearm Outside Home onlinebiker 57 4803 April 29, 2021 at 8:20 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Court Ordered Quarantine brewer 2 667 October 24, 2019 at 10:15 am
Last Post: Brian37
  Supreme Court Considers Mandatory Govt Funding of Religious Education EgoDeath 8 1447 September 24, 2019 at 10:37 am
Last Post: EgoDeath
  Fed Court, "hand over 8yrs of your finances" Brian37 15 1993 May 22, 2019 at 6:34 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2 Angrboda 330 37550 August 23, 2018 at 10:13 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  Court of Appeals Tells Alabama Shitheads to "Fuck Off!" Minimalist 6 1601 August 23, 2018 at 2:00 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  Federal Judge rules "No fundamental right to literacy" Cecelia 69 12946 July 2, 2018 at 10:52 pm
Last Post: Fireball



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)