Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jgmiller

(680 posts)
31. I'm really surprised they wanted to deal with this
Mon Jun 26, 2017, 05:33 PM
Jun 2017

It's a legal mine field. Let's say someone comes into their cake shop and says they want him to make a cake of a nude woman. I doubt there are many people that say he would be legally required to make that cake even if it offended him. If two gay men come into his cake shop and want to buy a cake for their wedding but there is nothing offending on the cake, not even their names or even figures of two guys then most logical people would say him denying them service is discriminatory. However every business has a sign that says they can refuse service for any reason. The couple went in there know they might not get served.

Where it really gets messy is where you draw the line. Did he ask the couple if they are gay? That seems discriminatory to me because he is vetting people asking personal information so he is violating their right to privacy. If they asked for two men on the cake and he said he would make a cake for them but he wouldn't put two men on it then to me that's not discriminatory because they are asking him to do something that is offensive to him, like the nude woman on a cake.

No matter what they rule they are going to create problems which is why I'm surprised they took it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

So this brings back racial segregation greymattermom Jun 2017 #1
K&R uppityperson Jun 2017 #2
Of course, as long as they're rich, white and Christian. mountain grammy Jun 2017 #3
Perhaps the Masterpiece Bake Shop could call God as a witness justhanginon Jun 2017 #4
I believe you have gotten to the crux of the matter rurallib Jun 2017 #17
+1 mountain grammy Jun 2017 #32
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2017 #5
Not good. LS_Editor Jun 2017 #6
SC voted to hear an "appeal"? it's kind of silly IMO-RW-rads to spend $$$$ about words on a cake. Sunlei Jun 2017 #7
The case was brought on the baker's behalf by the "Alliance Defending Freedom" Princess Turandot Jun 2017 #34
betcha pence has a woody,,,mom better watch out dembotoz Jun 2017 #8
Why are RW Christians so afraid of cakes? Coventina Jun 2017 #9
They are being asked to participate christx30 Jun 2017 #18
Sure, let them brand their business as mini churches and discriminate at will, BUT procon Jun 2017 #10
Leviticus is Jewish law. It is not Christian canon law. KWR65 Jun 2017 #12
Seriously? 😕 Do you really want to go down that path and preach procon Jun 2017 #14
Thanks for pointing that out BruceWane Jun 2017 #39
Any legal scholars out there? AJT Jun 2017 #11
I'm not a legal scholar but I did stay at a... MGKrebs Jun 2017 #20
There was a story covered a few years ago christx30 Jun 2017 #22
The examples you cite are distinguishable onenote Jun 2017 #24
Thanks for your interpretation of why the wedding cake is discrimination Freethinker65 Jun 2017 #30
As you are not denying service on grounds of race, sex, religion, or national origin, yes LanternWaste Jun 2017 #23
Nazi skinheads aren't a protected class TexasBushwhacker Jun 2017 #37
Change the fact pattern to a gay graphic designer to help promote geek tragedy Jun 2017 #44
I will make any gay couple their wedding cake adigal Jun 2017 #13
SC to consider whether the 1A's religion clauses allow a bakery to deny service to gay couples mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2017 #15
Seriously, this is what makes it kacekwl Jun 2017 #16
Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch are all shoo in votes for this. lark Jun 2017 #19
I don't think anyone is a shoe in on this one citood Jun 2017 #27
It will be very interesting, at a minimum. lark Jun 2017 #28
Jesus hates gay cakes! He's okay with tarts, though. ;-) WinkyDink Jun 2017 #21
sorry but we no longer make cakes for christians nt msongs Jun 2017 #25
ugh Voltaire2 Jun 2017 #26
The cake case, writes @smencimer, is custom-made for Justice Gorsuch: mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2017 #29
I'm really surprised they wanted to deal with this jgmiller Jun 2017 #31
You can put up a sign saying you reserve the right to refuse service for any reason, but onenote Jun 2017 #36
I'm afraid of this case going to the SC. mountain grammy Jun 2017 #33
No, they will not rule on the constitutionality of the Colorado law as a whole onenote Jun 2017 #35
I'm sure they did. But they also reported the offending baker TexasBushwhacker Jun 2017 #38
fuck these homophobes Skittles Jun 2017 #40
Poor Jack the baker. He probably can't sleep at night worrying that the friend Vinca Jun 2017 #41
This could backfire on the fundies big time. I hope it does. Initech Jun 2017 #42
Like it or not, there is a legitimate 1st Amendment issue here. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #43
I Agree RobinA Jun 2017 #45
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court will hear c...»Reply #31