EdibleKnife
Member
Refuse if you want but don't be surprised if your cake-making business can't pay the bills soon.
-
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.
Christian Cake Company Refuses to Create Cake for Group in Support of Gay Marriage
- Thread starter Deaf Spacker
- Start date
- Status
Yes. They are.
"No we dont want to make that cake take your money back" Is a... refusal of service!
UncleSporky
Member
Nope. He's equating "thing that a cake shop might refuse to put on a cake for any reason, right or wrong" with "thing that a cake shop might refuse to put on a cake for any reason, right or wrong."
If a cake shop refuses to put a design of fluffy bunnies on a cake, we might all consider that ridiculous, but they have the right. Maybe bunnies trigger them.
There is a difference between refusing a design, and asking them to make another request, and constantly refusing designs from the same person, even when they remake requests others make. Do you not think a baker should have the right to refuse a design? Do you think they basically have to act like a machine and can't choose what they do and don't make?
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
So he was equating having a stitching of two gay people on the cake to having stitching of a man gun down children...
KaiserBecks
Member
Or expect record sales because bigots eat cake, too.
UncleSporky
Member
No, he was equating "thing that a cake shop might refuse to put on a cake for any reason, right or wrong" with "thing that a cake shop might refuse to put on a cake for any reason, right or wrong."
That's not strictly true. Refusing to serve someone who is wearing a turban for instance is still classified as indirect discrimination. That means that you'd have to demonstrate that banning turban's as part of a wider headgear ban is a proportionate means of justifying a legitimate aim. I'm not sure how you'd demonstrate that in your example.
When it comes to "What can a baker refuse to make?", yes. The question is simple. What does the baker have the right to refuse to make and doesn't have the right to make? If it is so obvious the baker must make one and not the other, then why? If you think there is a difference, state a legal argument why? Don't just cry "Oh man slippery slope lol don't have to make a real point now." Make an argument that actually fits into law making, not a moral compass argument.
EdibleKnife
Member
Oh yeah that is infinitely more likely. All the churches in the area will probably start doing their business there soon.
UncleSporky
Member
Well I didn't specify that it was a cake shop. Maybe this place has whirring machinery overhead.
ab.aeterno
Member
I didn't say that, nor was it implied. I'm pointing out that drawing that distinction opens up the door for discrimination, and worse yet, in such a way that it would be hard to ever prove intent. And that's not something I'm comfortable with.
This isn't to suggest you must serve every request or none. Not only is that a false dichotomy, it's a poor argument.
The pattern would arguably indicate intent. If you reject say 10 cake designs from a gay couple for whatever reasons, it would indicate to me intent to discriminate. Also, in this specific case, them wanting to make a stand does not give me much confidence in their equal opportunity service.
You put far more faith in people than I do. Because it wasn't the populace at large that got racial integration or gay marriage ratified into law; and seeing the boost Chick fil A got from being a discriminatory company, I don't especially but this argument either.
As for your example, no, that's not something I think is OK.
CyclopsRock
Member
It's not about "expressions", it's about literal help. Clearly the campaign group - theories of them courting publicity aside - believed the cake would, in some way, help their goals be met. The other, non-swastika'y examples involve other things like a printing company producing leaflets for a political party they find objectionable or a hotel hosting an annual meeting of a group they disagree with. It's not about "being seen to be helping", it's about actually helping.
That's good for you, and I'm sure in time this will become even less of an issue than it is now. Northern Ireland is, however, still a very religious place, and I suspect the majority of people defending the bakery here don't have a problem with gay marriage, but they do have a problem with people "pushing the cultural definition" in a way that forces the hand of someone to support a cause they disagree with.
Chuckie
Member
This is a real difficult situation. They are refusing to bake a certain cake (for its message) and not necessarily the couple themselves. However it seems an extreme grey area.
Say the baker was against interracial marriage and refuses to bake a wedding cake with a black bride and white groom on it. Yet he says to them: I would bake you a cake with a white bride/groom or black bride/groom combination.
He is not refusing the couple, but for me it feels it is still discrimination.
Say the baker was against interracial marriage and refuses to bake a wedding cake with a black bride and white groom on it. Yet he says to them: I would bake you a cake with a white bride/groom or black bride/groom combination.
He is not refusing the couple, but for me it feels it is still discrimination.
Red Arremer
Member
OK since the negative pictures are obviously leading to the wrong results, let's approach it differently.
Let's say the customer wants a cake with the picture of a tomato on it. Should the baker not be allowed to say "No, I don't want to make a cake with a tomato on it"? Why should the baker be persecuted by the law because he doesn't want to make a cake with a tomato on it?
Let's say the customer wants a cake with the picture of a tomato on it. Should the baker not be allowed to say "No, I don't want to make a cake with a tomato on it"? Why should the baker be persecuted by the law because he doesn't want to make a cake with a tomato on it?
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
And he was doing so with his stupid fucking example of how morally someone can find a gay couple on a cake as offensive and wrong as a man killing kids on a cake.
You're also forgetting that shops can't just refuse service, "right or wrong". It's called discrimination, and in this case it's discrimination under the guise of "Religious Freedom".
Please, replace the word gay with anything race related and see how far it goes.
is that really so hard for you?
every person has its own moral compass.
just because you view something as wrong, doesn't mean the next person thinks its wrong.
Answer the question already. Can a baker refuse to make the cake of children being assaulted or not? I think more people in the world would agree that children being assaulted is bad than racism is bad, honestly. So I did replace gay with something else. So I'm asking you how far you would go with it.
FaintDeftone
Junior Member
This. It's a stupid decision as a business since they're refusing customers and money, but it is their choice to make.
Wow. Mental gymnastics again...
Are the people being served? No.
Why are they not being served? Gay cake.
Problem? The cake 'goes against their beliefs'.
Their beliefs? Gay people are icky.
Theyre discriminating against a customer based on their belief and refusing service. Saying 'oh but we will bake you a cake just not that' is dicrimination against that cake design. Again, based only on..... gay people are icky.
You dont have the right to do that, you cant pick and chose your customers. And you cant pretend that 'oh its not the customer its the cake' Because they are discriminating against that cake for a reason, its gayness. That is essentially still discrimination.
Their business offers custom designed cakes. This cake isnt offensive, it just happens to go against 'their beliefs'. Why should their beliefs matter in ANY case? Are they being asked to promote it? To show it in their shop window? To display their logo on it?
No, its a freaking cake company being asked to make an inoffensive cake for a customer. THE BASIS OF THEIR BUSINESS.
If they refused a cake that showed inter racial marriage, again, would that be ok? If they said 'we wont sell cakes promoting Catholic couples on their design' would that be ok?
And you cant pretend that 'its not refusing service just THAT cake' because that is the cake the customer wants, and its not offensive, it doesnt do anything wrong, its not outside their skill set, its a 'belief'. You cant refuse to make a cake for that reason.
And to put the cherry on top of this stupid pie of why is this even an issue in 2014, what would JESUS do? How many people did her turn away? And again, you cant run any business based on x religous values, nor should that be an excuse for anything, theyre not a non profit religous organisation or charity..
Are the people being served? No.
Why are they not being served? Gay cake.
Problem? The cake 'goes against their beliefs'.
Their beliefs? Gay people are icky.
Theyre discriminating against a customer based on their belief and refusing service. Saying 'oh but we will bake you a cake just not that' is dicrimination against that cake design. Again, based only on..... gay people are icky.
You dont have the right to do that, you cant pick and chose your customers. And you cant pretend that 'oh its not the customer its the cake' Because they are discriminating against that cake for a reason, its gayness. That is essentially still discrimination.
Their business offers custom designed cakes. This cake isnt offensive, it just happens to go against 'their beliefs'. Why should their beliefs matter in ANY case? Are they being asked to promote it? To show it in their shop window? To display their logo on it?
No, its a freaking cake company being asked to make an inoffensive cake for a customer. THE BASIS OF THEIR BUSINESS.
If they refused a cake that showed inter racial marriage, again, would that be ok? If they said 'we wont sell cakes promoting Catholic couples on their design' would that be ok?
And you cant pretend that 'its not refusing service just THAT cake' because that is the cake the customer wants, and its not offensive, it doesnt do anything wrong, its not outside their skill set, its a 'belief'. You cant refuse to make a cake for that reason.
And to put the cherry on top of this stupid pie of why is this even an issue in 2014, what would JESUS do? How many people did her turn away? And again, you cant run any business based on x religous values, nor should that be an excuse for anything, theyre not a non profit religous organisation or charity..
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Right, doesn't mean you have the right to discriminate based on sexual orientation, race or religion. If I own a restaurant and I have my "moral compass" set to find inter-racial couples horrid, I can't just kick them out because of my belief system.
Yes, this is hard to argue with. As noted, there is a distinction between "I refuse to serve this person in any capacity" and "I refuse to fulfill this particular request."
ab.aeterno
Member
Because a tomato isn't representative of a historically opposed minority looking to achieve parity on basic human rights. I understand what you're getting at, but equating the logo for an organization for a minority group to something frivolous ignores the context of discrimination. No one opposes tomatoes, AFAIK, on religious grounds; note is there a history of religious persecution of tomatoes.
You managed to miss my point completely. I wasn't addressing this situation specifically but the argument the person I was quoting was putting forth in a general context.
Yeah, it's the difference between "I will not make this PERSON anything" and "I will not make this THING for any person."
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Yes, because that's not based on WHO A PERSON IS ON A FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL.
Once again, you're equating a horrible act of violence being portrayed on a cake to having two people of the same sex kissing or holding hands on a cake.
He would have to or say 'he cant for _________' reason. You have a skill set you are offering the public. If you cant literally do something you have to tell them you dont have that skill set, look for someone better, or you cant do x because of y. But why should 'belief' matter? And you cant turn it into a stupid rhetorical question, no one discriminates against tomatoes. Like I said, would an inter racial couple on a cake be ok to discriminate against? No, not unless you literally dont have the skill to make a freaking black candy dude on top of the cake.
And how is asking someone to do their job making someone 'support their cause'? Does a cake maker become part of the marriage? Do they get updates on the divorces of couples theyve made cakes for? Do they go on the honeymoon with them?
Chuckie
Member
So what do you guys think of the hypothetical situation described by me?
Red Arremer
Member
Answer the other question please. Should the baker be forced by the law to make that cake with a tomato on it, or should he be allowed to refuse the request of that tomato cake?
UncleSporky
Member
Alright, pack it up folks. No comparisons can ever be made again, because all of them fail to take into account the subtle nuances etc. etc.
Compare to something negative and you're wrong because you've compared a good thing with a negative thing or are a slippery slope asshole. Compare to something mundane and you're wrong because there's nothing controversial about the mundane thing. You can't successfully compare anything, so don't even try.
None of that can be effectively put into law. How do you determine "who a person is on a fundamental level"? How do you argue that in court? How does any of that get boiled down to an objective level? If you want to say that is wrong, fine. It's a different thing entirely when you are trying to put it into law.
Jesus, you just said "Change it to race and see how far it goes." I simply changed it to something even worse than race. I intentionally chose something worse because I knew you would agree with the baker to refuse it. Why? Because I need you to see why a baker should have some control over saying no to a particular design. Now when you get down to determining what is okay and what isn't okay to deny, you'll realize there is no effective way to build a law around that.
if your moral compass is all 3 will go to hell (the shooter and booth gays) nothing is changed in the end.
they are all sinners... (religion is something great...)
Except there is and always will be. Something genuinely offensive to the public. Done.
I think they should have the right to refuse it.
Amory
Member
There's a difference between saying sorry, I won't make that particular cake and hanging a sign in the window saying we don't serve gays.
Why would you even want to give this place your business at this point, other than to say "ha ha! We threatened you into doing something you didn't want to do!"
No, because it isn't discriminating against an unchangeable part of a person's makeup. Tomatoes aren't covered in the UKs equality laws. Sexuality is.
What?
Or to stop a company from discriminating. Why are they refusing that cake? Lets stop pretending there are not real people behind all this. It isnt about ernie and bert, its about gay marriage and homosexuals. "Were fine with your buiness as long as its nothing gay?" How is that better then "No gays!"? Ones at least open.
Chuckie
Member
But are they discriminating?
Not to stray too much off topic, but I wonder if it's the slogan they have the problem with or the Bert and Ernie depiction. This gets into a intresting area. If they don't want to make a cake because of a slogan, would they have a problem with a tradional wedding cake with say two grooms on top of the cake, without any kind of message? If they do, then aren't they discriminating based on lifestyle and not an idealogical message? I know this is also complicated by the fact that gay marriage isn't even legal there.
Yes, there are people BEHIND THE BUSINESS. They aren't machines that are slaves to their clients. They can refuse to make something they don't want to make, for their own reasons. They don't owe you a cake and you don't owe them money intrinsically. If they want to go their whole life never making a particular cake, they have every right to just that.
A person can refuse to make something that is offensive to the general man on the street. Offensive. Children being killed is offensive. Making a cake for a gay group fighting for equal rights, not quite the same thing. on any level.
Question is, do discrimination laws protect cakes? Refusing to make the cake because the clients are gay is certainly distinguished from refusing to make a cake about gay marriage.
I support gay marriage. However, I'm not comfortable saying that people should be forced to create things that are oppose to their beliefs, no matter how wrong headed they may be. If an Atheist commissioned a cake that said "Everyone is born Atheist" -- they shouldn't have to make that cake.
Likewise, if I'm the customer I don't want someone making the cake if they don't want to. I'm much happier taking my money elsewhere. I do think its good to bring public attention to the issue since people have a right to make informed decisions about who they are giving their money to.
Red Arremer
Member
OK, so every baker would be forced by the law to make cakes with motifs that are covered in the UK's equality law, if it came down to it?
So essentially, every job in which something is created in a creative process (painting, sculpture, website, music, etc.) would NOT be allowed to refuse any order by a customer who is protected by equality laws, unless they would want to be persecuted, if that content is in any way referring to the people covered by said equality law.
That's very good to know.
I don't understand what you're saying here? The UK has passed law to say that you are unable to discriminate against someone based on their sexuality, despite any religious views that may be held by that person.
No, of course not. Artists aren't necessarily businesses. There is no compulsion on someone to create something if asked to do so. If you offer a service whereby you do create art, and then unreasonable declined a request based on someone's age, race, sexuality etc, then you'd probably be falling foul of equality laws.
They are discriminating cakes, not people.
- Status