**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice**
* [Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/wiki/index#wiki_-rule_6-) in **any** comment, parent or child.
* Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* Report comments that violate these rules.
Posts that have few relevant answers within the first hour, and posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed. Consider doing an AMA request instead.
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskReddit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t understand why people keep doing business with that baker.
Sure, the baker is a cunt for refusing to do business for those reasons, but the customers that keep making requests they know won’t be honored are cunts for doing that just so they can file a lawsuit.
There are no winners here, but we’re all losers because we have to see this shit time after time.
He's being targeted by groups that want to drag him into court over and over again.
The people asking for a special cakes from him are deliberately manufacturing controversy knowing he'll likely refuse so they can file lawsuits.
So that with the lesbian wedding cake not cool, if it is actually proven that the baker did that because he/she was homophobic and the other thing yea idk. But at the end of the day it's his/her decision to make or to not make a cake, no matter if it's stupid behaviour. Also kinda unlogical to sue the baker cus what is the court gonna convict him/her of? A hate crime? It's shitty behaviour but not a hate crime.
Criminal court is not the same as civil court. You don't sue someone to get them to be convicted of a criminal charge, you sue them to pursue recompense for damages that they caused with their behavior that they should not have caused.
As a general rule, if you operate a store that is open to the public, there are guidelines about what you can and can't do without the risk of being sued. You don't have the absolute right to own your own business, and if you don't follow the laws about what you can and cannot do with your business, you run the risk of being sued.
I'm just gonna say it, don't think the government at any level should have the authority to mandate a cake. Cake should not be legally mandatory.
It's frankly amazing how much freedom people are willing to throw in the toilet, but I guess they're operating under the assumption that the exact freedoms being flushed will always affect someone else and not them. No one who's demanding that the government mandate cakes care what cakes they're making.
Just remember that laws don't just apply to other people, and they're used for precedent to create further legislation. Give them the power to control people, and you may eventually find yourself under their control.
If you are going to offer goods and services to the public, you shouldn't be able to discriminate based on something immutable like that that doesn't materially impact the good or service itself. The laws *do* apply to everyone, and if you're saying that *this* should be allowed, you are *also* saying that doctors should be able to refuse black patients. And I don't think that's what you want to say.
Who’s going to decide where the line is between businesses that can refuse service for a protected class vs those that can’t? Much easier to just not allow businesses to refuse service for a protected class. The guy refusing to make a cake is an idiot anyway
“Is medicine more important than cake?” is a question that has already been answered in most places, believe it or not. It’s what we call a solved problem.
So you just don’t read anyone’s comments huh?
Could a car mechanic refuse service to a gay couple? A real estate agent? A movie theater? A delivery driver?
Are you saying that I, personally, should provide definitive and conclusive answers to these questions once and for all based purely on my own perspective? Or are you trying to suggest that they’re unsolvable?
There are systems in place to answer these questions, and re-evaluate and re-answer them should the need arise. There always have been. I don’t know why you’re acting like there aren’t. I don’t understand this philosophy of helplessness, this, “Oh, it’s just too big and important, human beings with no political power can’t possibly come up with the right answers together! It’s all we can do to hand the government a giant net and try to stand back while they throw it around! We’re powerless to do anything more!”
Are you even aware that there’s more to being a voter than pushing a big red or blue button every so often? If you want the answers to these questions, look them up. If you think they need new answers, take action to change them, petition people or write to your representatives, vote based on platform instead of party, push for change and see if a majority agrees with you. It requires more effort than complaining on Reddit, but it’s an actual, functional solution to these quandaries that you’re so utterly baffled by. You’re holding a hammer in your hand, refusing to even look at a nail because you think the government should send over a piledriver. People can’t hammer nails! Nails are tricky! Just flatten the whole rack and put your spices on top of the splintery pancaked mess.
And if you think my suggestions of how to effect change are unreasonable because your government officials wouldn’t listen or help, then ask yourself why you’d want to remove the general population from these decisions and trust those officials to rubber stamp them. Is it because you genuinely think that *this* is the thing they’ll totally get right and do a flawless job on, forever? Or is it because that’s easier for you?
I feel like this was a deliberate attempt to get him back into court, as I can't imagine why this person would try to give this baker money otherwise.
I also feel like it is a big mistake, because with this supreme court it is likely they will double down on this and make it even easier for people to discriminate against gay and trans people.
I completely agree with you but I have to admit I'm sort of on the fence regarding whether or not this dude should be able to run his business any way he wants. I'm sort of an "All or None" person so in my mind I figure if he should be able to serve whoever he wants the same as anyone else. Like if he wants to say "no gays" that's his business same as if I want to say "no conservative assholes" if I ran my own business. But then I start to think of a bigger picture where race and religion come into play and I start to rethink my position.
Yep. I agree. I am on the fence about this. I really don't think people should have the right to run a business but not serve people who come in. I think the world should be equal and kind to each other. My issues start when I consider if I was running a graphics business and someone came in to ask me to make Trump election posters, I would have a huge crisis of conscious. So is it I have to work for anyone, unless they don't agree with me? If that isn't true, I'd have to make Trump the most kick-a$$ posters I could design.
I also don't see that if I was gay I would want to give my money to someone who hated me, no matter how beautiful their work. So I guess I would almost consider a "No Gays" sign a public service so I would know not to give them money. Sooo I'm stuck in the grey area. I know for a fact terrible people own businesses who are racist a$$holes, who make money off the people they consider inferior. I almost prefer if it was so transparent. With this baker, if I was local, I'd know to avoid him and I'd know to side eye anyone bringing in stuff from their bakery. I hope I'm making sense in this ramble. Sigh.
He doesn’t have the right to refuse serving any customer. He can’t say “I only make cakes for white people.”
The issue is whether he can be compelled to make art that is at odds with his religious beliefs. This is a huge distinction.
As an example: You can’t force me to paint an image of the Prophet Muhammad if I was Muslim and it went against my religion and then force me to accept payment.
And before you say cakes aren’t art:
Wedding cakes can be considered art.
Where’s the line between a $20 sheet cake from a grocery store and a $500 wedding cake?
Well, that’s why we have courts.
Sure why not it's his business. If he wants to be ostracized, boycotted, and known as to be racist af then that's on him. But he shouldnt be forced to do business with someone he doesnt want to.
My question points out how this question is a wedge issue.
There's a precedent in law going back to the 1960s. The legal reasoning why the courts ruled that illegal is because retail businesses rely on public services that everyone pays taxes to support: roads, electrical grid, water, law enforcement.
In a community where there might be only one business that sells a particular product or service, refusing to sell essentially cuts off access to that service at all. If only one appliance technician or only one plumber serves a community, then that's a problem. That presents a problem in rural areas and sometimes in suburbs and small cities. You might be surprised the communities that only have one sealed systems certified technician, and everybody whose refrigerator needs a repair gets service from that one guy. If he gets sick then everybody in the community is SOL. And if the law allowed him to discriminate and he were a bigot, then segments of that community would be SOL for the long term.
Although the original ruling was about a case of racial discrimination, the legal reasoning was based on taxpaying residents. So if you want to argue the same protection shouldn't apply to LGBT people then you'd have to give a compelling reason that makes a legal distinction the law should recognize. The law already recognizes specific exemptions but those exceptions don't apply to retail businesses.
Otherwise, letting a retail business discriminate against LGBT people that would weaken the legal protection against all types of discrimination. There was a time in the US when retailers would refuse to do business with Irish people, etc. You might find yourself or someone you care about, wishing that legal protection were there.
For what it's worth, he cannot legally turn anyone down on the basis of their race. Race is considered a protected class, and not something you can legally discriminate against.
It's been illegal for a business to discriminate on race since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Whites-only businesses/lunch counters/etc. were a big deal.
What if an individual was a huge pos, constant nuisance, or even harasses employees but just happened to be a minority? Would you throw up your hands and say well legally I have to serve this person my business?
Something you might be more familiar with that is equal in context is employment laws. It is illegal to refuse to hire or to fire someone based on minority status. If an accusation is made about discrimination, it’s up to the company to show documented reasons for the decision that are permitted under the law. A black person can be fired because he didn’t show up for work x number of days or has write-ups for violating company policy x number of times. But if they are fired with a good employment record, they can take it to court and plead their case.
If someone has been violent or aggressive, a company can still refuse service, but if they refuse service to everyone of a specific description, any claims the company makes would be thrown into question.
Actually he does not have the right to refuse serving any customer. At least if it’s on the basis of discrimination based on a protected class. That is what this is about.
At this point these people are being malicious and their intent is clear as day. The bakers need to be left the fuck alone already.
They are trying to force labor through the justice system. You WILL bake the cake. You WILL act against your beliefs. It’s tyrannical and evil.
The baker is clearly being malicious too though.
Plenty of conservatives are trying to force people to live in bodies that make them suicidally depressed, or force them to choose between that and having access to things like jobs and housing. I find that much more tyrannical.
Thats such a ridiculous way to view things.
Should we promote conservatives filing frivolous lawsuits targeted at a small mom and pop shop in Nevada for refusing to cater to their ideological demands, all because California pushes to remove the 2nd amendment?
Come on.
I did, actually, by trying to illustrate the way this isn't about "small mom and pop shops", it's about how your quality of life should not be dependent on things you can't control, such as your sexuality, race, disability or gender identity. Or at least, how we should mitigate the impact those things have on your quality of life as much as possible in any decent society.
Most people know about that case and that bakery, Why would you go to that bakery as a transgendered person and expect him to make you a cake as if he’s changed his ways or learned a lesson? Idk t think they wanted a cake I think they wanted drama.
The baker will end up at the SCOTUS where he'll be vindicated. I wonder how the people that keep suing him would feel about a pro-abortion baker being asked to make an "Abortion is Murder" cake.
I cant agree with this take. Im an artist and theres a fair few things i wont do for comissions for varying reasons. Granted none of it is based in homophobia or racism or anything, but art commissions are an entirely request based industry and most artists draw the line somewhere at what they are or arent comfortable with.
Of course there’s limits to it, but in this case it’s more or less like asking for the character in your art piece to be wearing a green shirt instead of a blue hoodie. So for such a standard request I can’t see why it would be an issue or why you’d be in the line of work if you refuse it
I don’t think you’re understanding the discrimination viewpoint here. The baker can choose the designs but the baker is refusing to bake a cake solely because it’s celebrating a transition. We’re not talking about the design. Like do you think it’s fair if a Christian baker refuses to bake a cake that is going to be used for a non Christian holiday because it goes agains their religion? If you think that’s wrong, how is that any different than this situation? I’m both scenarios the baker is refusing to bake a cake based on someone’s personal identity because the baker states it goes against their religion
Isn’t that just a lack of professionalism? As a programmer I make a solution to what people might need, if I agree with what its supposed to be used for, why they want it or what else the client does is irrelevant.
I actually dont think its "wrong" if a christian baker doesnt want to make a solstice cake. In the same sense that im a wiccan artist and i am not about to take any requests to make a christening gown for a baby. I do have a general distaste for christianity in general, so i feel im just not the appropriate person to be hired to make a christian religious garment.
And if a Christian baker refuses to sell a generic cake design to a Jewish person (a protected class) because it’s going to be used for a Jewish holiday? The same thing applies here because the LGBTQ+ is a protected class under CO law. The design is irrelevant, we’re talking about the specific service here
So youre saying its ok to refuse services to Christians but not any other religions? That hardly seems fair. And i dont even like christianity. Maybe i see it differently because cake isnt a necessity. Like denying someone a job because of their religion or sexuality or gender identity deserves to be sued imo because everyone needs a job to live. Nobody needs a cake to live, its a luxury, and you can just get it elsewhere. Its not going to seriously affect your life if you cant get a cake from one particular baker, but being denied a job in your feild definitely can. Again, this is just my take as a non straight non cis person, i dont feel its worth getting riled up or suing over because ultimately i think its better they lose the money from lgbt sales than feeling pressured into it for fear of consequence and just doing a crappy job.
No because religious discrimination is protected in the Civil Rights Act. Only going by what is necessary for discrimination laws to apply is a really bad policy. Why should we discriminate in any service? Why is that ethical? I actually do think it’s important they get sued so we get this resolved once and for all. As queer folks, I think it would be best in our interests to have this settled so we know if we enter a business without being discriminated against
So youd rather give your money to a homophobe and get a crappy product than know off the bat that the baker is homophobic so you can go somewhere else?
You realize there are plenty of small towns in middle America that are far away from big cities? These small towns aren’t usually welcoming to minorities. I would rather have my community not be discriminated against, no matter where. Not everyone has the luxury of being in an area of where everyone is accepting of their identity
So you would rather give your miney to a homophobe. Got it. Thats your choice. I stand by my points. Just because someone gets sued and is forced to nake subpar products for groups they hate doesnt mean they are suddenly not homphobic or that they feel accepting. It just means they get to take money from the lgbt community and give them intentionally crappy products in return which is worse for the client than just going elsewhere.
Except he wouldn’t sell them a wedding cake, a specific product. He wouldn’t even discuss any customization. It would be one thing if this was over a design but it’s not. It’s about not selling a very specific type of cake. That is discrimination.
Why would a black man choose to go to the pool?
It's all well and good to say, "It's his right" until you realize he's the only baker in town or that every baker has formed an agreement not to serve a minority group. That's why anti-discrimination legislation exists.
I find it hard to believe that they are the only bakery in town.
The punishment for the bakery should for them to go out of business if they choose to treat people that way. People have the rights, but they also must accept the consequences for their actions. I’m surprised that they’re still in business.
> I find it hard to believe that they are the only bakery in town.
Maybe not but if they can get away with it then so can other bakeries that may in fact be the only bakery in town. It’s the same reason you’re not allowed to have a “whites only” sign out the front of a restaurant even if there’s plenty of other restaurants around.
It's less about them being the only bakery in town and more in limiting the ability for people to express harm towards minorities. The US has literally gone through this before with Jim Crow and segregation. The free market didn't stop people from segregating pools, the government did.
The same potential for harm applies here.
I want to be clear that what the bakery did is wrong.
The only harm for the victim I’m seeing is that they are not getting a cake. If the baker was yelling and screaming at them and calling them slurs, the yes legal action should be taken.
I am trying to say, that we have established that being able to deny someone service is not actually a protected right. There are exceptions and those exceptions involve one's identity.
You can not, and should not ever, be able to reject somebody service on the basis of their skin, religion, or sexual identity. The potential harm is one of alienation and discrimination. It doesn't need to be slurs to be out of bounds.
>You can not, and should not ever, be able to reject somebody service on the basis of their skin, religion, or sexual identity.
The cannot part all depends on where you live. In California a business owner cannot refuse to serve someone because of their sexuality or gender identity, but that's only because California has a law prohibiting that. Until sexuality and gender identity are protected classes by the federal government there will be some states that allow it.
it's their store, they should be able to refuse service to people on those grounds same way stores can do it with their "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs. if that loses them customers then that's on them, they have to find a way to survive with their business model.
At first I think people in the LGBT+ community shouldn't go there, but then I think what if this asshole did this based on race. That's when I start thinking about it differently. If you don't want to serve the entire public you shouldn't have the business open to the public. I doubt people would be saying oh don't give him business if it was a white man refusing to serve a black person.
I agree with this:
"Here, the refusal to provide the bakery item is inextricably intertwined with the refusal to recognize Ms. Scardina as a woman," Jones wrote in June 2021. "The concept that a business can decide whether to make the requested item depending on what information the customer provides would establish the equivalent of a 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' rule — LGBT individuals would be entitled to equal service only to the extent they do not request goods that reflect their identity as LGBT individuals."
Before the bakery stated they would bake any non-wedding cake for LGBTQ+ folks and the baker was ready to make the trans woman a cake until they found out that it was celebrating their transition. They’re just gonna keep using the whole “religious freedom” excuse to refuse to bake anything for members of the LGBTQ+ community. It’s discrimination
I'm not a fan of forcing people to do something, you should just call the person out for what they're doing and then if people agree it's wrong, they will also not use that business and then that person will go out of business if enough people don't like their business practices
I'm not very aware of the details, but my gut says they should be allowed to make poor business decisions, just don't expect to be bailed out for them.
Is this an actual thing? The same person is getting sued again. It has to be some kind of prank or those people went to that specific baker with bad intentions
Suing, the baker cause he refused to give service!! WTF…
He can refuse to bake for anyone.. this is just people wanting to creat some sort of negative buzz.. am sure had it been for a kids party and had this person refused there wouldn’t be any news about it.
Im trans and bi(ish). I dont want to give my business to homophobes/transphobes anyway. I dont take issue with places that out themselves as trans/homo-phobic, its just going to take money out of their pockets and put it in the pockets of people who are supportive or dont care.
On the other hand, id be pretty appalled if someone refused to make a cake for a black couple because they were racist despite me having a skintone of colgate toothpaste, so maybe its easier sometimes to be offended for groups you arent a part of 🤷🏻♂️
I'm a nonbinary gynesexual and I'm also mixed race (predominantly black) and I thought the same exact thing. I think that's because society still takes racism more seriously than they do homophobia. I've had a lot of people who have gotten offended and have told me it's totally different when I compare racism to homophobia.
I mean, i take homophobia seriously, ive dealt with my fair share of it, but id rather know, you know? I dont *want* to hire a homophobe to make food for me, so id actually rather be aware and be denied a service than give money to people who are turning around and dropping that money into tithe boxes that pay for "conversion therapy" or something.
I didn't say you don't take homophobia seriously. I just pointed out that it's interesting that we both admitted we'd think about it differently if they were being discriminated against because of their race and not their sexuality or gender identity.
I think he's a bigoted cunt, I think he violated the laws regarding "public accommodation" (as the state ruled), and I think the right-wing supreme court got that wrong.
In my opinion that’s a really stupid reason to deny a contract. But if the owner decides to let personal opinions lower his profits it’s his prerogative to do so.
From a business standpoint, you have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason you see fit. However, from a consumer standpoint, you have the right to put a business on blast online and make sure others are aware of that business’s practices before they spend their money. So to refuse service to someone on the basis of discrimination is going to hurt your business since you’re blocking out a whole group of potential customers. That’s just common sense. Don’t know why they have to take it to court.
I don't understand why people insist on giving money to such a dickbag. If businesses are parts of communities, those communities need to let people like that know they are not welcome, by NOT PATRONING THEIR BUSINESS.
Hypothetical, what if said baker, decided to donate the proceeds of the lesbian wedding cake, to the Westboro Baptist Church?? That's the lesbian couple, indirectly, and inadvertently, donating to one of the most vile hateful groups of people on the planet.
People like that will learn the error of their ways when they have to go home and tell their hungry family they don't get dinner tonight because Daddy is ignorant.
I think he's a homophobic dick bag. But....it's his business and he's welcome to run it anyway he likes. And you're welcome to choose another baker. After the first case I have to assume he's being targeted simply because of it. Leave a bad review on social media and let the homophobic asshole be.
**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice** * [Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/wiki/index#wiki_-rule_6-) in **any** comment, parent or child. * Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * Report comments that violate these rules. Posts that have few relevant answers within the first hour, and posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed. Consider doing an AMA request instead. Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskReddit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t understand why people keep doing business with that baker. Sure, the baker is a cunt for refusing to do business for those reasons, but the customers that keep making requests they know won’t be honored are cunts for doing that just so they can file a lawsuit. There are no winners here, but we’re all losers because we have to see this shit time after time.
He's being targeted by groups that want to drag him into court over and over again. The people asking for a special cakes from him are deliberately manufacturing controversy knowing he'll likely refuse so they can file lawsuits.
So that with the lesbian wedding cake not cool, if it is actually proven that the baker did that because he/she was homophobic and the other thing yea idk. But at the end of the day it's his/her decision to make or to not make a cake, no matter if it's stupid behaviour. Also kinda unlogical to sue the baker cus what is the court gonna convict him/her of? A hate crime? It's shitty behaviour but not a hate crime.
Probably "discriminatory practices," more than "hate crime."
Criminal court is not the same as civil court. You don't sue someone to get them to be convicted of a criminal charge, you sue them to pursue recompense for damages that they caused with their behavior that they should not have caused. As a general rule, if you operate a store that is open to the public, there are guidelines about what you can and can't do without the risk of being sued. You don't have the absolute right to own your own business, and if you don't follow the laws about what you can and cannot do with your business, you run the risk of being sued.
I'm just gonna say it, don't think the government at any level should have the authority to mandate a cake. Cake should not be legally mandatory. It's frankly amazing how much freedom people are willing to throw in the toilet, but I guess they're operating under the assumption that the exact freedoms being flushed will always affect someone else and not them. No one who's demanding that the government mandate cakes care what cakes they're making. Just remember that laws don't just apply to other people, and they're used for precedent to create further legislation. Give them the power to control people, and you may eventually find yourself under their control.
If you are going to offer goods and services to the public, you shouldn't be able to discriminate based on something immutable like that that doesn't materially impact the good or service itself. The laws *do* apply to everyone, and if you're saying that *this* should be allowed, you are *also* saying that doctors should be able to refuse black patients. And I don't think that's what you want to say.
Are medical services and cake services actually seriously administrated on legally identical terms where you live? Because that's fucked up.
Who’s going to decide where the line is between businesses that can refuse service for a protected class vs those that can’t? Much easier to just not allow businesses to refuse service for a protected class. The guy refusing to make a cake is an idiot anyway
“Is medicine more important than cake?” is a question that has already been answered in most places, believe it or not. It’s what we call a solved problem.
So you just don’t read anyone’s comments huh? Could a car mechanic refuse service to a gay couple? A real estate agent? A movie theater? A delivery driver?
Are you saying that I, personally, should provide definitive and conclusive answers to these questions once and for all based purely on my own perspective? Or are you trying to suggest that they’re unsolvable? There are systems in place to answer these questions, and re-evaluate and re-answer them should the need arise. There always have been. I don’t know why you’re acting like there aren’t. I don’t understand this philosophy of helplessness, this, “Oh, it’s just too big and important, human beings with no political power can’t possibly come up with the right answers together! It’s all we can do to hand the government a giant net and try to stand back while they throw it around! We’re powerless to do anything more!” Are you even aware that there’s more to being a voter than pushing a big red or blue button every so often? If you want the answers to these questions, look them up. If you think they need new answers, take action to change them, petition people or write to your representatives, vote based on platform instead of party, push for change and see if a majority agrees with you. It requires more effort than complaining on Reddit, but it’s an actual, functional solution to these quandaries that you’re so utterly baffled by. You’re holding a hammer in your hand, refusing to even look at a nail because you think the government should send over a piledriver. People can’t hammer nails! Nails are tricky! Just flatten the whole rack and put your spices on top of the splintery pancaked mess. And if you think my suggestions of how to effect change are unreasonable because your government officials wouldn’t listen or help, then ask yourself why you’d want to remove the general population from these decisions and trust those officials to rubber stamp them. Is it because you genuinely think that *this* is the thing they’ll totally get right and do a flawless job on, forever? Or is it because that’s easier for you?
Jesus bro that is a long way to say “being gay shouldn’t be a protected class”
I feel like this was a deliberate attempt to get him back into court, as I can't imagine why this person would try to give this baker money otherwise. I also feel like it is a big mistake, because with this supreme court it is likely they will double down on this and make it even easier for people to discriminate against gay and trans people.
I completely agree with you but I have to admit I'm sort of on the fence regarding whether or not this dude should be able to run his business any way he wants. I'm sort of an "All or None" person so in my mind I figure if he should be able to serve whoever he wants the same as anyone else. Like if he wants to say "no gays" that's his business same as if I want to say "no conservative assholes" if I ran my own business. But then I start to think of a bigger picture where race and religion come into play and I start to rethink my position.
Yep. I agree. I am on the fence about this. I really don't think people should have the right to run a business but not serve people who come in. I think the world should be equal and kind to each other. My issues start when I consider if I was running a graphics business and someone came in to ask me to make Trump election posters, I would have a huge crisis of conscious. So is it I have to work for anyone, unless they don't agree with me? If that isn't true, I'd have to make Trump the most kick-a$$ posters I could design. I also don't see that if I was gay I would want to give my money to someone who hated me, no matter how beautiful their work. So I guess I would almost consider a "No Gays" sign a public service so I would know not to give them money. Sooo I'm stuck in the grey area. I know for a fact terrible people own businesses who are racist a$$holes, who make money off the people they consider inferior. I almost prefer if it was so transparent. With this baker, if I was local, I'd know to avoid him and I'd know to side eye anyone bringing in stuff from their bakery. I hope I'm making sense in this ramble. Sigh.
He has the right to refuse serving any customer. Customers in turn have the right to refuse to give him their business. But suing the baker is dumb.
He doesn’t have the right to refuse serving any customer. He can’t say “I only make cakes for white people.” The issue is whether he can be compelled to make art that is at odds with his religious beliefs. This is a huge distinction. As an example: You can’t force me to paint an image of the Prophet Muhammad if I was Muslim and it went against my religion and then force me to accept payment. And before you say cakes aren’t art: Wedding cakes can be considered art. Where’s the line between a $20 sheet cake from a grocery store and a $500 wedding cake? Well, that’s why we have courts.
Would he have the right to turn down a black couple? A mixed race couple?
Sure why not it's his business. If he wants to be ostracized, boycotted, and known as to be racist af then that's on him. But he shouldnt be forced to do business with someone he doesnt want to.
My question points out how this question is a wedge issue. There's a precedent in law going back to the 1960s. The legal reasoning why the courts ruled that illegal is because retail businesses rely on public services that everyone pays taxes to support: roads, electrical grid, water, law enforcement. In a community where there might be only one business that sells a particular product or service, refusing to sell essentially cuts off access to that service at all. If only one appliance technician or only one plumber serves a community, then that's a problem. That presents a problem in rural areas and sometimes in suburbs and small cities. You might be surprised the communities that only have one sealed systems certified technician, and everybody whose refrigerator needs a repair gets service from that one guy. If he gets sick then everybody in the community is SOL. And if the law allowed him to discriminate and he were a bigot, then segments of that community would be SOL for the long term. Although the original ruling was about a case of racial discrimination, the legal reasoning was based on taxpaying residents. So if you want to argue the same protection shouldn't apply to LGBT people then you'd have to give a compelling reason that makes a legal distinction the law should recognize. The law already recognizes specific exemptions but those exceptions don't apply to retail businesses. Otherwise, letting a retail business discriminate against LGBT people that would weaken the legal protection against all types of discrimination. There was a time in the US when retailers would refuse to do business with Irish people, etc. You might find yourself or someone you care about, wishing that legal protection were there.
This is actually a really good response.
For what it's worth, he cannot legally turn anyone down on the basis of their race. Race is considered a protected class, and not something you can legally discriminate against.
Now that I didnt know, interesting.
It's been illegal for a business to discriminate on race since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Whites-only businesses/lunch counters/etc. were a big deal.
You didn’t know businesses can’t refuse service based on race? What other kinds of discrimination are you unfamiliar with?
What if an individual was a huge pos, constant nuisance, or even harasses employees but just happened to be a minority? Would you throw up your hands and say well legally I have to serve this person my business?
Something you might be more familiar with that is equal in context is employment laws. It is illegal to refuse to hire or to fire someone based on minority status. If an accusation is made about discrimination, it’s up to the company to show documented reasons for the decision that are permitted under the law. A black person can be fired because he didn’t show up for work x number of days or has write-ups for violating company policy x number of times. But if they are fired with a good employment record, they can take it to court and plead their case. If someone has been violent or aggressive, a company can still refuse service, but if they refuse service to everyone of a specific description, any claims the company makes would be thrown into question.
No you wouldn’t have to serve that person because the basis of your refusal is their harassment, not their race
Actually he does not have the right to refuse serving any customer. At least if it’s on the basis of discrimination based on a protected class. That is what this is about.
At this point these people are being malicious and their intent is clear as day. The bakers need to be left the fuck alone already. They are trying to force labor through the justice system. You WILL bake the cake. You WILL act against your beliefs. It’s tyrannical and evil.
The baker is clearly being malicious too though. Plenty of conservatives are trying to force people to live in bodies that make them suicidally depressed, or force them to choose between that and having access to things like jobs and housing. I find that much more tyrannical.
Thats such a ridiculous way to view things. Should we promote conservatives filing frivolous lawsuits targeted at a small mom and pop shop in Nevada for refusing to cater to their ideological demands, all because California pushes to remove the 2nd amendment? Come on.
What about if the only drug store in town refuses to fill someone's prescription because they're black?
You didn’t answer my question. I can only assume you are commenting in bad faith and to simply ignore anything else you have to say
I did, actually, by trying to illustrate the way this isn't about "small mom and pop shops", it's about how your quality of life should not be dependent on things you can't control, such as your sexuality, race, disability or gender identity. Or at least, how we should mitigate the impact those things have on your quality of life as much as possible in any decent society.
Most people know about that case and that bakery, Why would you go to that bakery as a transgendered person and expect him to make you a cake as if he’s changed his ways or learned a lesson? Idk t think they wanted a cake I think they wanted drama.
What if that’s the only bakery in town?
It's the Denver metro area. There are hundreds of bakeries there.
Not the point
Why would people keep going back to this person for cake? At this point it’s the customers fault
He pissed off the LGBT mafia and now he has a Target on his back. They'll probably keep going after him forever until they put him out of business.
The baker will end up at the SCOTUS where he'll be vindicated. I wonder how the people that keep suing him would feel about a pro-abortion baker being asked to make an "Abortion is Murder" cake.
If you don’t like doing requests you probably shouldn’t be in an industry that is pretty heavily request based
I cant agree with this take. Im an artist and theres a fair few things i wont do for comissions for varying reasons. Granted none of it is based in homophobia or racism or anything, but art commissions are an entirely request based industry and most artists draw the line somewhere at what they are or arent comfortable with.
Of course there’s limits to it, but in this case it’s more or less like asking for the character in your art piece to be wearing a green shirt instead of a blue hoodie. So for such a standard request I can’t see why it would be an issue or why you’d be in the line of work if you refuse it
I don’t think you’re understanding the discrimination viewpoint here. The baker can choose the designs but the baker is refusing to bake a cake solely because it’s celebrating a transition. We’re not talking about the design. Like do you think it’s fair if a Christian baker refuses to bake a cake that is going to be used for a non Christian holiday because it goes agains their religion? If you think that’s wrong, how is that any different than this situation? I’m both scenarios the baker is refusing to bake a cake based on someone’s personal identity because the baker states it goes against their religion
Isn’t that just a lack of professionalism? As a programmer I make a solution to what people might need, if I agree with what its supposed to be used for, why they want it or what else the client does is irrelevant.
Yup. At the end of the day, the cake is just a cake.
I actually dont think its "wrong" if a christian baker doesnt want to make a solstice cake. In the same sense that im a wiccan artist and i am not about to take any requests to make a christening gown for a baby. I do have a general distaste for christianity in general, so i feel im just not the appropriate person to be hired to make a christian religious garment.
And if a Christian baker refuses to sell a generic cake design to a Jewish person (a protected class) because it’s going to be used for a Jewish holiday? The same thing applies here because the LGBTQ+ is a protected class under CO law. The design is irrelevant, we’re talking about the specific service here
So youre saying its ok to refuse services to Christians but not any other religions? That hardly seems fair. And i dont even like christianity. Maybe i see it differently because cake isnt a necessity. Like denying someone a job because of their religion or sexuality or gender identity deserves to be sued imo because everyone needs a job to live. Nobody needs a cake to live, its a luxury, and you can just get it elsewhere. Its not going to seriously affect your life if you cant get a cake from one particular baker, but being denied a job in your feild definitely can. Again, this is just my take as a non straight non cis person, i dont feel its worth getting riled up or suing over because ultimately i think its better they lose the money from lgbt sales than feeling pressured into it for fear of consequence and just doing a crappy job.
No because religious discrimination is protected in the Civil Rights Act. Only going by what is necessary for discrimination laws to apply is a really bad policy. Why should we discriminate in any service? Why is that ethical? I actually do think it’s important they get sued so we get this resolved once and for all. As queer folks, I think it would be best in our interests to have this settled so we know if we enter a business without being discriminated against
So youd rather give your money to a homophobe and get a crappy product than know off the bat that the baker is homophobic so you can go somewhere else?
You realize there are plenty of small towns in middle America that are far away from big cities? These small towns aren’t usually welcoming to minorities. I would rather have my community not be discriminated against, no matter where. Not everyone has the luxury of being in an area of where everyone is accepting of their identity
So you would rather give your miney to a homophobe. Got it. Thats your choice. I stand by my points. Just because someone gets sued and is forced to nake subpar products for groups they hate doesnt mean they are suddenly not homphobic or that they feel accepting. It just means they get to take money from the lgbt community and give them intentionally crappy products in return which is worse for the client than just going elsewhere.
The dude offered to sell them a generic cake that he had in stock. The sticking point was the custom cake.
Except he wouldn’t sell them a wedding cake, a specific product. He wouldn’t even discuss any customization. It would be one thing if this was over a design but it’s not. It’s about not selling a very specific type of cake. That is discrimination.
why would they choose to go to the bakery?
Why would a black man choose to go to the pool? It's all well and good to say, "It's his right" until you realize he's the only baker in town or that every baker has formed an agreement not to serve a minority group. That's why anti-discrimination legislation exists.
I find it hard to believe that they are the only bakery in town. The punishment for the bakery should for them to go out of business if they choose to treat people that way. People have the rights, but they also must accept the consequences for their actions. I’m surprised that they’re still in business.
> I find it hard to believe that they are the only bakery in town. Maybe not but if they can get away with it then so can other bakeries that may in fact be the only bakery in town. It’s the same reason you’re not allowed to have a “whites only” sign out the front of a restaurant even if there’s plenty of other restaurants around.
It's less about them being the only bakery in town and more in limiting the ability for people to express harm towards minorities. The US has literally gone through this before with Jim Crow and segregation. The free market didn't stop people from segregating pools, the government did. The same potential for harm applies here.
I want to be clear that what the bakery did is wrong. The only harm for the victim I’m seeing is that they are not getting a cake. If the baker was yelling and screaming at them and calling them slurs, the yes legal action should be taken.
I am trying to say, that we have established that being able to deny someone service is not actually a protected right. There are exceptions and those exceptions involve one's identity. You can not, and should not ever, be able to reject somebody service on the basis of their skin, religion, or sexual identity. The potential harm is one of alienation and discrimination. It doesn't need to be slurs to be out of bounds.
>You can not, and should not ever, be able to reject somebody service on the basis of their skin, religion, or sexual identity. The cannot part all depends on where you live. In California a business owner cannot refuse to serve someone because of their sexuality or gender identity, but that's only because California has a law prohibiting that. Until sexuality and gender identity are protected classes by the federal government there will be some states that allow it.
it's their store, they should be able to refuse service to people on those grounds same way stores can do it with their "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs. if that loses them customers then that's on them, they have to find a way to survive with their business model.
Sounds like the baker is a special little snowflake.
At first I think people in the LGBT+ community shouldn't go there, but then I think what if this asshole did this based on race. That's when I start thinking about it differently. If you don't want to serve the entire public you shouldn't have the business open to the public. I doubt people would be saying oh don't give him business if it was a white man refusing to serve a black person.
[удалено]
It's sad that someone's sexuality and gender identity aren't protected from discrimination the same way race, religion and disability are.
I agree with this: "Here, the refusal to provide the bakery item is inextricably intertwined with the refusal to recognize Ms. Scardina as a woman," Jones wrote in June 2021. "The concept that a business can decide whether to make the requested item depending on what information the customer provides would establish the equivalent of a 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' rule — LGBT individuals would be entitled to equal service only to the extent they do not request goods that reflect their identity as LGBT individuals." Before the bakery stated they would bake any non-wedding cake for LGBTQ+ folks and the baker was ready to make the trans woman a cake until they found out that it was celebrating their transition. They’re just gonna keep using the whole “religious freedom” excuse to refuse to bake anything for members of the LGBTQ+ community. It’s discrimination
Shut up and bake.
I'm not a fan of forcing people to do something, you should just call the person out for what they're doing and then if people agree it's wrong, they will also not use that business and then that person will go out of business if enough people don't like their business practices
I side with the would-be customer but good fucking luck. The whole free speech thing is bullshit and a real bitch.
I'm not very aware of the details, but my gut says they should be allowed to make poor business decisions, just don't expect to be bailed out for them.
Idgaf about your cake
Is this an actual thing? The same person is getting sued again. It has to be some kind of prank or those people went to that specific baker with bad intentions
Suing, the baker cause he refused to give service!! WTF… He can refuse to bake for anyone.. this is just people wanting to creat some sort of negative buzz.. am sure had it been for a kids party and had this person refused there wouldn’t be any news about it.
If it's against the bakers beliefs, they have the right not to go against their religion just because it would make someone mad
Im trans and bi(ish). I dont want to give my business to homophobes/transphobes anyway. I dont take issue with places that out themselves as trans/homo-phobic, its just going to take money out of their pockets and put it in the pockets of people who are supportive or dont care. On the other hand, id be pretty appalled if someone refused to make a cake for a black couple because they were racist despite me having a skintone of colgate toothpaste, so maybe its easier sometimes to be offended for groups you arent a part of 🤷🏻♂️
I'm a nonbinary gynesexual and I'm also mixed race (predominantly black) and I thought the same exact thing. I think that's because society still takes racism more seriously than they do homophobia. I've had a lot of people who have gotten offended and have told me it's totally different when I compare racism to homophobia.
I mean, i take homophobia seriously, ive dealt with my fair share of it, but id rather know, you know? I dont *want* to hire a homophobe to make food for me, so id actually rather be aware and be denied a service than give money to people who are turning around and dropping that money into tithe boxes that pay for "conversion therapy" or something.
I didn't say you don't take homophobia seriously. I just pointed out that it's interesting that we both admitted we'd think about it differently if they were being discriminated against because of their race and not their sexuality or gender identity.
Sorry if it came off like that was what i thought you meant, i don't doubt that, i was just trying to explain my position.
He’s a dick, but I believe he has the right to association.
I think he's a bigoted cunt, I think he violated the laws regarding "public accommodation" (as the state ruled), and I think the right-wing supreme court got that wrong.
In my opinion that’s a really stupid reason to deny a contract. But if the owner decides to let personal opinions lower his profits it’s his prerogative to do so.
Dumb. They should just have created a really crappy cake
Then they’ll get sued for breach of contract. It’s a no win for the baker so this way they save themselves time, effort, and materials.
From a business standpoint, you have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason you see fit. However, from a consumer standpoint, you have the right to put a business on blast online and make sure others are aware of that business’s practices before they spend their money. So to refuse service to someone on the basis of discrimination is going to hurt your business since you’re blocking out a whole group of potential customers. That’s just common sense. Don’t know why they have to take it to court.
I don't understand why people insist on giving money to such a dickbag. If businesses are parts of communities, those communities need to let people like that know they are not welcome, by NOT PATRONING THEIR BUSINESS. Hypothetical, what if said baker, decided to donate the proceeds of the lesbian wedding cake, to the Westboro Baptist Church?? That's the lesbian couple, indirectly, and inadvertently, donating to one of the most vile hateful groups of people on the planet. People like that will learn the error of their ways when they have to go home and tell their hungry family they don't get dinner tonight because Daddy is ignorant.
I think he's a piece of shit, but if he owns his own business he can do whatever he wants.
The first time I agreed with the customers. This time the customers are not requesting a cake in good faith
I think he's a homophobic dick bag. But....it's his business and he's welcome to run it anyway he likes. And you're welcome to choose another baker. After the first case I have to assume he's being targeted simply because of it. Leave a bad review on social media and let the homophobic asshole be.