I would assume that because legally one's sexuality is a protected class while being a gay hater is not. By claiming that his religion is being discriminated against he would imply that this hate speech is intrinsically connected to Christianity. Don't think that'll hold up when it comes down to it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bakery under fire for refusing to make anti-gay cake.
- Thread starter Camwi
- Start date
- Status
Oh boy, haha.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
LOL what kind of warped thinking and mental gymnastics do you have to go through to consider discouraging hate speech against gays as an attack against religion? I don't understand the logic at all.
GeordieMark
Member
Can't these idiots just bake their own cakes.
Sounds like a set-up.
The bakery should have baked a custard pie with 'NO' iced onto it and stuck it right in these idiots kissers.
Sounds like a set-up.
The bakery should have baked a custard pie with 'NO' iced onto it and stuck it right in these idiots kissers.
These are the type of people who are already well accustomed to warped thinking and mental gymnastics.
Liamario
Banned
Good to see that people are perceptive to what is going on here. What a piece of shit.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Bingo.
crazygambit
Member
It's not that simple. If it's the same cake everyone else gets made then it's not a special commission and refusing would be the same as refusing service, which is illegal.
But if it's a special custom cake job, they can certainly refuse.
There's no inconsistency here.
Bakeries that refused to make cakes for gay weddings refused based solely on the person and the idea alone. As far as I remember, they were just regular cakes and nothing that would have offended the baker and their religion had to be scribed on the cake. Now if the bakery in this story refused to make this person a cake based on the religion of that person, then there's a problem.
Hopefully this lawsuit gets laughed at and thrown out, but I'm sure this will cause some drama.
Bakeries that refused to make cakes for gay weddings refused based solely on the person and the idea alone. As far as I remember, they were just regular cakes and nothing that would have offended the baker and their religion had to be scribed on the cake. Now if the bakery in this story refused to make this person a cake based on the religion of that person, then there's a problem.
Hopefully this lawsuit gets laughed at and thrown out, but I'm sure this will cause some drama.
DoktorEvil
Banned
Are those normally bakery made?
I'd like to think bakeries would go out of their way to make the most non-offensive cakes possible to service as many people as possible, but can be also commissioned to do cake projects, such as the OPs story.
Bakery is of course in the right and has authority to refuse service to anyone they see fit. Just goes to show you that this kind of shit works both ways.
If we want to keep have these investigations into discrimination of places of business, just know that this is on the other end of that discrimination spectrum, and will have equal justification in the eyes of law. Anything else would be, of course, discrimination.
Is that really what people want? Everyone can be spun a bigot in some way, under the auspices of law, and this is kind of proof of that.
On another note, this is why religious protection laws are stupid. If we just agreed that independent entities can make their own decisions about who they do business with, we wouldn't need religious protection clauses that cause more trouble than good. We're in pretty deep into this rabbit hole and anti-discrimination laws, and I'm generally not a fan.
If we want to keep have these investigations into discrimination of places of business, just know that this is on the other end of that discrimination spectrum, and will have equal justification in the eyes of law. Anything else would be, of course, discrimination.
Is that really what people want? Everyone can be spun a bigot in some way, under the auspices of law, and this is kind of proof of that.
On another note, this is why religious protection laws are stupid. If we just agreed that independent entities can make their own decisions about who they do business with, we wouldn't need religious protection clauses that cause more trouble than good. We're in pretty deep into this rabbit hole and anti-discrimination laws, and I'm generally not a fan.
Exactly.
A gay person could go in and request "God hates fags" on a cake, and the baker would still refuse. All customers - regardless of trait, creed, etc - are treated equally in this regard.
Whereas for a case involving a wedding cake maker, the baker is essentially putting a sign up in their shop's front window that says "No Fags, Please."
...
Y'know what I'm getting a chuckle out of from all of this? The GOP's establishment is hopeful that this SCOTUS case would take the pesky whole gay issue off the table.. but the party's base is going to keep on pushing this shit.
Marriage equality may come, but voters aren't going to magically forget. This issue will continue to nag them until the anti-equality folks in their base lose their power.
sir_kevith
Member
Here's how the decision was made regarding the Oregon bakery:
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Sweet-Cakes-by-Melissa-owners-vow-to-fight-state-241026131.html
The bakery is not a religious institution so it didn't matter what the owners thought about gay marriage. This is the right way.
These other people are requesting offensive hate speech and trying to claim it's religion when one can clearly see it's just hate speech. The bakers were right to turn them away.
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Sweet-Cakes-by-Melissa-owners-vow-to-fight-state-241026131.html
The bakery is not a religious institution so it didn't matter what the owners thought about gay marriage. This is the right way.
These other people are requesting offensive hate speech and trying to claim it's religion when one can clearly see it's just hate speech. The bakers were right to turn them away.
God Dayumm
Banned
It is disgusting, but I can see it flying in some places.
Obviously this is just a retaliation against that other bakery, but I'm curious if this bakery can face any legal action for this. I assume there's a world of difference between refusing to make a cake for a same sex wedding and refusing to make a cake decorated with hate speech.
Haha, yep! The complainant is presumably going to have to prove in court that 'God hates gays'. I tried to write a sentence outlining how ridiculous that is and I gave up, so I can't imagine any lawyer giving it a shot. Mind you, I'm not getting paid for it.
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
But won't the bigots have to pay money for this lawsuit and aren't they ridiculously likely to lose?
Exterminieren
Banned
It's quite simple.
Gay people are a protected class.
Bigoted people are not.
Gay people are a protected class.
Bigoted people are not.
Shameless reference from this season?
DoktorEvil
Banned
It all depends on how her business is set up.
Extra Sauce
Member
Who knew bakeries would become the frontline of the battle for gay rights.
But we're talking about cakes, not people. The bigot wasn't refused service and the gay person wasn't refused service. In both cases, the bakery refused to make a particular cake design. Refusing to make a particular cake is not the same as refusing to give a particular group service.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Let's say you live in a small town. This town has 4 gas stations. You're dark skinned, kind of middle eastern looking. All 4 of these gas stations refuse service to you because you might be a muslim and they don't like that. Guess you don't get a car. So take a bus. Woops, all the buses don't want any of your kind on them. Guess you walk. Well then some guys mug you because you look foreign. The cops don't care, you're brown and probably muslim. None of these businesses or services have to do anything, because there's no laws protecting you.
This is why these laws exist and are needed because that's a very real situation that our country battled with, except with race instead of religion, not even 100 years ago.
And no, this doesn't work both ways. There's a fundamental difference between disagreeing with someone's opinion and disagreeing with something about them they cannot change. One is just disagreeing, the other is discrimination.
Can you explain how they weren't refusing gay patrons? The gay patrons went to shops that make wedding cakes, and then were refused service.
If the homosexual couples had made a cake which says "God loves gays" just because they wanted that cake, that would be similar.
The gays knew. We love our sweets
Were homophobic cakeries willing to make wedding cakes for the gay couples -- just not the specific one they asked for? If they had asked for a different wedding cake for the same gay marriage, was there suggestion that the cakery would have made it?
Neuromancer
Member
Who are the intolerant ones again?!
The bakery is being accused for religious discrimination. That's obviously not true but it's being twisted that way.
This is embarassing. This shouldn't even have made the news unless the focus was to expose the customer as the instigating piece of shit he/she is. The article should include a picture of the customers face with a red X across it, with the words Asshole across the top instead of a picture of the bakery.
Christberg
Member
I suppose I have to go buy a cake from these guys later...
No, hate speech is not religious freedom.
No, hate speech is not religious freedom.
quickwhips
Member
Should have baked the cake. Charged more for the letters.
Sword Familiar
178% of NeoGAF posters don't understand statistics
If the bakery runs into some kind of financial problems due to this I would be happy to donate a smaller sum in the hopes of more people doing the same for them. This kind of shit is not acceptable.
That's not quite true. In the gay marriage case, they refused to bake them a cake. In this case they offered to bake the cake and provide the materials so the individual could complete the message themselves.
Remember, wedding cakes rarely have any sort of messaging on them -- they're just decorated. The bakeries in those cases claimed even making a cake for gay couples went against their religious beliefs.
That's where I draw the line. I feel there is a distinction between "I will make no wedding cakes for you" and "I won't make this particular wedding cake for you".
Obviously. But the 2012 case that started this (Colorado bakery refused to make cake for same-sex wedding happening in Massachusetts) probably was too.
DoktorEvil
Banned
Once again, that distinction depends on how the bakery provides their services.
http://www.azucarbakery.com/
It looks like more of a bakery commissioning business than a retail bakery. You have to schedule time with someone to get a tasting vs buying a plain cake and having the counterperson decorate it.
In this case, she was well within her rights to deny service.
If she did and this story was subsequently picked up by USA Today as well, her opportunity cost of receiving more business would be hampered just because of short tern financial gain.
Violence Jack
Member
This won't go anywhere. What a douchecock. Refusing to write hate speech isn't discrimination pal.
However, the bakery probably thanks him for his complaint for the support they'll receive because of it.
However, the bakery probably thanks him for his complaint for the support they'll receive because of it.
- Status