It's the same exact thing.
Patrick Stewart Supports Bakery That Refused "Support Gay Rights" Cake
- Thread starter ShadowKingpin
- Start date
- Status
It's the same exact thing.
I think both parties involved could have handled it way better. It was wrong for the bakers to take the money and then refuse to make the cake. Could have gotten someone else to make it. Or if they felt that strongly about their beliefs impacting their business then they would have rejected the request as it was asked or made it clear as some sort of notice on the building or their website which would have given them something to fall back on.. On the other side, if it was me and I had the cake refused, I would have gone "Wow, what a bunch of tossers, I'll take my business elsewhere." and be done with it.
I don't think a business should be allowed to discriminate on a basis of race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation.
And while I think Stewart means well, I disagree that his stance can be separated from being opposed to gay rights. You can't support discrimination while simultaneously claiming to support equality.
And while I think Stewart means well, I disagree that his stance can be separated from being opposed to gay rights. You can't support discrimination while simultaneously claiming to support equality.
There is a difference between fulfilling an order that was only done to publicly shame your company, or making a cake with a message, that is totally unrelated to your company.
SyenceLabb
Member
So, like someone else asked earlier. . a muslim cakebaker should draw his prophet on a cake just because i want him to? Sounds like you're saying he/she should,since it has nothing to do with the business.
Refusing an order isn't discrimination in and of itself. Disagreeing with a message and declining to complete the commission is perfectly reasonable for any business.
That said, if any money changed hands it should've been given back to the people and ideally that's the end of it.
DoktorEvil
Banned
Agreed.
Totally absurd.
By what legal obligation shall it become incumbent upon a business owner to perceive the very intention of a customer in regards to the use of their product?
If I buy a Big Mac with the sole purpose of making a youtube video about how much it sucks and I blow it up with a firecracker, is that not publicly shaming McDonalds, and by your logic, must they not only predict that I will do this, but also rightfully not sell to me?
Nike refused because of the content of the requested product. A court found that the bakery refused because of the sexuality of the customer. They're not the same.
I was under the impression that there were multiple cake cases, and that the one being discussed in this thread was likewise a customer being refused on the grounds of the content of the requested product.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
That is correct.
Nike rejected it because it clearly implied that their shoes are associated with abusive labor practices (the truth hurts, but that's for another thread.)
This bakery is refusing to make a cake because they don't like gay marriage.
So how are those the same thing?
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Did you actually read that link? The court found that choosing not to make the cake WAS discrimination against the man's person because he "felt discriminated against", even though a straight person ordering the cake would also have been refused it, which is just stupid.
You are basically arguing either that artisans cannot refuse orders on the basis of personal political or religiousconviction, or that protected minorities need to have special exemptions from that right of refusal.The disagreement in this thread is coming from those who think that an individual artisan's right to free expression of their skill trumps all other political considerations.
Edit: Threads like this give me a rare gladness for America's political distance from the rest of the world. Individual liberty 4eva, brothers.
agiantenemycrab
Member
I do agree that ideally we absolutely should strive to maintain these principles if at all possible. This decision was not an idealistic one however. This was a pragmatic decision, and given the context, that makes a lot of sense to me. They simply ruled in favour of the lesser of two evils. They would rather deviate from idealistic principles than allow a majority to impose itself further on a minority. I think they made the right call, although I am biased as I belong to that minority, as I've mentioned.
I don't know if the court's decision was sound, I don't have all the information they did, but I am trying to correct the notion that the bakery was fined because they refused to bake a certain cake. They weren't, they were fined because they refused to serve a specific person based on discriminatory reasoning. Maybe the court got it wrong, I don't know, but that doesn't change the underlying rational of the ruling.
ProfessorLobo
Banned
Who is going to write the very long list of opinions that are acceptable for businesses to reject because they're 'bad' and opinions impossible for businesses to reject because they're 'good'. Don't you people see how fucking dangerous this is?
This is not the same thing.
CoolZombie
Member
I agree with what Patrick said on this.
There is a difference between a business saying I will not participate and be a vessel for your hate and prejudice and a business saying I will not be a vessel and participate in X because I hate it and am prejudice against it.
Now whether they should have the legal right to either of those situations is a different story. But they are not the same thing.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
Look, it boils down to how you can't force someone to create something they don't want to create. But you CAN force someone to not discriminate against who their customers are. If a gay person and a straight person both want the same cake made then the baker couldn't refuse the gay person and accept the straight person.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Refusing to a bake a normal cake for a gay customer/couple? Should be outlawed.
Refusing to make a cake a certain way (containing text you find morally offensive, for example)? Should be allowed.
I think Stewart's position is that it's too bad the baker feels that way about gay rights, but sometimes respecting everyone's rights means they're going to use them in a way we don't like. It's the cost of freedom.
Exactly.
Refusing to make a cake a certain way (containing text you find morally offensive, for example)? Should be allowed.
I think Stewart's position is that it's too bad the baker feels that way about gay rights, but sometimes respecting everyone's rights means they're going to use them in a way we don't like. It's the cost of freedom.
Exactly.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
There's not a damn thing wrong with what the man said. Move on.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Wal-Mart has refused to make Hitler cakes. Not everything's protected.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/12/child_named_after_adolf_hitler.html
I already answered that.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Just bake the fucking cake, you stupid bigots.
Templar Wizard
Member
Well is the meaning here, do you personally disagree with the message but are forced to accept it?
Or can you exercise your own judgment? Or GOD FORGIVE your own opinion.
Is this text ok?
'consensual sex between 65 and 5 year olds is fine, happy birthday'
Or can you exercise your own judgment? Or GOD FORGIVE your own opinion.
Is this text ok?
'consensual sex between 65 and 5 year olds is fine, happy birthday'
No it's not. It's dumb, sure, but straight people have been allowed to safely declare that for ten thousand years, yet the genius hero who arguably saved millions of lives in world war 2 was chemically castrated for writing "I'm gay" secretly, in small print, inside the privacy of his own home and driven to suicide.
No, because that is not only promoting something illegal, it is also against the common morals and ethics of society as a whole (not to mention the fact, that you can't have consensual sex with a 5 year old).
It's not totally unrelated: the bakers are Christians and religious people hold god over the rules of mere mortals. They should not be forced to write 'Support Gay Rights' or other such statements on a cake.
The fact you are comparing having sex with a 5 year old to gay rights says a lot about you.
Templar Wizard
Member
Apologies, I ment to have 15 year olds.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Yeah, fine, still cunts.
From a purely logic standpoint this is not the same. Objecting to something because I don't support rape or an illegal activity is different from objecting to something legal and ethically fine because of a prejudice and because you harbor hatred for it.
One is refusing to be a vessel for rape encouragement while the other is being against something because of hateful prejudice.
Frankly this is quite a disgusting false equivelency TBH.
Still illegal. Still rape.
Templar Wizard
Member
FIRST off, its not about GAY RIGHTS, gays have all their rights, nothing away from them.
Get married, don't get married, same as anyone.
But if someone doesn't agree with gays getting married, even if they CAN, the same way people can be against 'straights' getting married. Well, let them exercise their opinion.
There is a different between Christians and "Christians". The first ones hold god over the rules of mere mortals. The others use god to justify their byzantine beliefs.
God has no problem with gay people.
EDIT: And what the shop owner believes in has nothing to do with his business. If he can't separate business stuff from his private beliefs, he shouldn't have opened a shop in the first place.
Couldn't you make that argument for nearly any religious issue, like the previous question asking Muslim bakers to draw their prophet on a cake? Denying art is just a 'byzantine belief' after all, and goes against the spirit of religion and business according to your posts.
lol at the irony of using gendered insults for this topic, don't be that guy indeed
However I do agree
Personally I think religious beliefs should kept within whatever community of faith you belong to. There is however a difference between religious beliefs that are shared between everyone of said religion and don't object the common ethics of society as a whole and what is described here, which is the exact opposite.
Christianity is not about oppressing (the rights of) anyone and self-declared Christian people that think gay marriage is against their beliefs, are acting against their own religion and god.
Why are you emphasising, that they are "children's tv puppets"? What has that to do with anything?
Is that poster the LGBT community of my university plastered all over the city early this year, twisted as well? It's advertising a party btw.
This poster is bullshit!
Luigi is the one who has crossdressed using peach dress and hinted to maybe swing that way, not Mario!
Mario's a lady's man ;3
Vatican leaders called gay marriage a "defeat for humanity" so it's definitely still a Christian issue, and will likely continue to be so in various African countries as well in addition to Western ones.
In my opinion this cake issue is more about freedom of speech and religion than it is equality. You can't force/fine an artisan to write something that is against their belief, no matter what that belief is.
Technically they are, on a strictly religious tone and despite what a bajillion american "christians" think, saying/writing "God Hates Gays" is a blasphemy because it's "using the name of the lord in vain" and basically whoever says this verbatim is also "playing god" by dictating what "god would say". A baker could refuse to do both of these cakes due to their religious ideology.
Im astounded at the enourmous population of so called "christians" that doen't realize this.
Spehornoob
Member
But the people he's talking about didn't refuse to serve a gay couple. They refused to put a specific message on the cake. Should we force people to make products supporting causes they don't believe in?
Eyemus Lutt
Member
I think you're confusing discriminating against the person as opposed to disagreeing with the message. It would be more akin to a fundamentalist christian going to get a sign/banner made stating "Vote no on gay marriage," or a similar message from a gay artist/sign-writer. I don't think any business should be forced to do something they don't agree with as long as they don't mind making a cake for the gay couple with a non political/religious message.
PreFire
Member
But Bert and Ernie aren't even gay lol
Thought this was known by now. They're better off showing the gay couple from Modern Family, even though it would only be half right.
Patrick Stewart didn't say anything wrong. Neither is the bakery.
I hope those people who are trying to make a cake, get it done, of course. They just need to go somewhere else.
Thought this was known by now. They're better off showing the gay couple from Modern Family, even though it would only be half right.
Patrick Stewart didn't say anything wrong. Neither is the bakery.
I hope those people who are trying to make a cake, get it done, of course. They just need to go somewhere else.
- Status