SCOTUS Rules About Colorodo Baker

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 01:28 PM)PhilHos Wrote: If I recall correctly, this baker had actually served many gay people. The baker had actually baked a few wedding cakes for gay couples. And, IIRC, he even decorated cakes for gay people. The only thing he didn't do was decorate the cakes for gay couples to be used in gay weddings.

While people can still argue, he was discriminating, you can't claim he didn't serve gay people. IF this is the same baker I'm think of.

That's why the baker's defense appealed to freedom of speech as artistic expression. Had the gay couple simply purchased a generic cake, there'd have been no problem.  So he was not refusing service in the traditional sense. The baker just did not want to create a gay-friendly theme in decorating the cake though, you know, writing words like "Go Gay" or "Gay is the Way!" or creating the image of two men kissing.

Maybe like a Bengals fan baker who would sell to Steeler fans but refuse to write "go Steelers" on a cake.

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-06-2018, 12:43 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Like I said, I do not oppose women, I just do not support them playing football. It's my belief that women playing sports is wrong, not because women are women. I just believe it because my faith tells me that women engaging in something that does not involve me, does not hurt anyone, and involves only those who choose to participate is immoral and a sin. It's just as bad as killing someone because a sin is a sin.

I still support women cooking and cleaning or even voting, I just won't sell any sports equipment to women because I do not support women playing sports. I won't sell them a baseball mitt but I'll still sell them an oven mitt.


See at the root of all of it, I am discriminating against women for being women, not just them playing sports. It's the fact that they as women are playing the sport.

To better explain what I'm getting at here I'll start this from scratch.

A gay man walks into a bakery and asks the baker to bake him a cake for his gay wedding. The baker then refuses to bake the cake for the gay man. The gay man then asks the baker why he doesn't want to bake a cake for his gay wedding. The baker then tells him that he doesn't want to bake him a cake for his gay wedding because "He believes that it's wrong".

The gay man then asks why it's wrong to have a gay wedding. The baker then says "Because I believe gay marriage isn't recognized by God". Being overcome with shock, the gay man then responds "So you're refusing to bake me a cake because I'm gay? ". The baker responds, "No, it's not because you're gay, it's because I don't believe gay marriage is something God agrees with, therefore I don't agree with it and as a result will not bake you a cake to celebrate something I don't agree with". The gay man then says, "No, you are refusing to bake me a cake because I'm gay." The baker then says, "No I'm not. If you asked me to bake a cake for your birthday, I would, because I don't see anything wrong with a gay man celebrating his birthday".

The gay man then says, "But if a straight person was having a straight wedding you would bake them a cake". The baker responds, "Yeah, I would bake them a cake, but not because they're straight. I would bake them a cake because I see nothing wrong with straight people getting married". The gay man then responds "So why is there nothing wrong with straight people getting married?". The baker then responds, "Because I don't believe God sees anything wrong with it therefore I don't see anything wrong with it and therefore will bake them a cake".

The baker then says, "Now if a straight person asked me to bake a cake for their gay friends wedding I wouldn't. Not because their friend is gay, but because I don't believe gay people should get married. Not because gay people are gay, but because I believe God says it's wrong for gay people to get married."

The gay guy then says, "Okay I get it, you think it's wrong because God thinks it's wrong. But why can't you bake me a cake because you think that God thinks it is wrong for gay people to get married?" I'm not doing anything to you by rebelling against whatever your supposed God thinks."

The baker then responds, "You're right, you're not doing anything to me. But by baking a cake for you I feel that I would be celebrating rebellion against God, and therefore would be tied to the rebellion myself".

The point is, in this scenario the fact that gay people are gay is not the reason the baker refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings. He refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings because he sees it as an act against God. And he sees it as an act against God because he believes God doesn't agree with it, not because gay people are gay.

[BmorePat87]

(06-06-2018, 07:31 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: To better explain what I'm getting at here I'll start this from scratch.

A gay man walks into a bakery and asks the baker to bake him a cake for his gay wedding. The baker then refuses to bake the cake for the gay man. The gay man then asks the baker why he doesn't want to bake a cake for his gay wedding. The baker then tells him that he doesn't want to bake him a cake for his gay wedding because "He believes that it's wrong".

The gay man then asks why it's wrong to have a gay wedding. The baker then says "Because I believe gay marriage isn't recognized by God". Being overcome with shock, the gay man then responds "So you're refusing to bake me a cake because I'm gay? ". The baker responds, "No, it's not because you're gay, it's because I don't believe gay marriage is something God agrees with, therefore I don't agree with it and as a result will not bake you a cake to celebrate something I don't agree with". The gay man then says, "No, you are refusing to bake me a cake because I'm gay." The baker then says, "No I'm not. If you asked me to bake a cake for your birthday, I would, because I don't see anything wrong with a gay man celebrating his birthday".

The gay man then says, "But if a straight person was having a straight wedding you would bake them a cake". The baker responds, "Yeah, I would bake them a cake, but not because they're straight. I would bake them a cake because I see nothing wrong with straight people getting married". The gay man then responds "So why is there nothing wrong with straight people getting married?". The baker then responds, "Because I don't believe God sees anything wrong with it therefore I don't see anything wrong with it and therefore will bake them a cake".

The baker then says, "Now if a straight person asked me to bake a cake for their gay friends wedding I wouldn't. Not because their friend is gay, but because I don't believe gay people should get married. Not because gay people are gay, but because I believe God says it's wrong for gay people to get married."

The gay guy then says, "Okay I get it, you think it's wrong because God thinks it's wrong. But why can't you bake me a cake because you think that God thinks it is wrong for gay people to get married?" I'm not doing anything to you by rebelling against whatever your supposed God thinks."

The baker then responds, "You're right, you're not doing anything to me. But by baking a cake for you I feel that I would be celebrating rebellion against God, and therefore would be tied to the rebellion myself".

The point is, in this scenario the fact that gay people are gay is not the reason the baker refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings. He refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings because he sees it as an act against God. And he sees it as an act against God because he believes God doesn't agree with it, not because gay people are gay.

So he sees marriage as an act against god... if it involves gay people.

The root of it is still the sexuality of the person. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 07:51 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So he sees marriage as an act against god... if it involves gay people.

The root of it is still the sexuality of the person. 

Do you have a problem with a 5 year old and 29 year old being friends?

Do you have a problem with a 5 year old and a 29 year old getting married?

Is the difference the age or the relationship? 

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 07:31 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote:  The baker responds, "No, it's not because you're gay, it's because I don't believe gay marriage is something God agrees with, therefore I don't agree with it and as a result will not bake you a cake to celebrate something I don't agree with". The gay man then says, "No, you are refusing to bake me a cake because I'm gay." The baker then says, "No I'm not. If you asked me to bake a cake for your birthday, I would, because I don't see anything wrong with a gay man celebrating his birthday".

The gay man then says, "But if a straight person was having a straight wedding you would bake them a cake". The baker responds, "Yeah, I would bake them a cake, but not because they're straight. I would bake them a cake because I see nothing wrong with straight people getting married". The gay man then responds "So why is there nothing wrong with straight people getting married?". The baker then responds, "Because I don't believe God sees anything wrong with it therefore I don't see anything wrong with it and therefore will bake them a cake".

The baker then says, "Now if a straight person asked me to bake a cake for their gay friends wedding I wouldn't. Not because their friend is gay, but because I don't believe gay people should get married. Not because gay people are gay, but because I believe God says it's wrong for gay people to get married."

If this baker's life premise is that he does what God wants, then he needs to go back to Sunday school. The Bible is the Word of God for most Christian bakers.  And I am pretty sure the Bible doesn't say anything at all about gay marriage. 

However, the God in the Bible does say it is wrong just to BE gay.

Leviticus 20: 13-15 If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

I.e., God doesn't give a darn whether gays get married or not. He wants them dead because they are gay.  The baker is not following the word of god by suffering gays to live, but just disapproving of their marriage.

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 08:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you have a problem with a 5 year old and a 29 year old getting married?

N -- wait, are they gay or straight?

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 08:57 PM)Dill Wrote: N -- wait, are they gay or straight?

Doesn't matter. Thanks for helping illustrate the point. 

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 09:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Doesn't matter. Thanks for helping illustrate the point. 

Mattered for the baker, obviously. If not for you.

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 10:01 PM)Dill Wrote: Mattered for the baker, obviously.  If not for you.

So are you saying the baker was asked to bake cakes for the weddings of a male/female of folks 5 and 29 and a wedding of male/male of folks 5 and 29 or did the point absolutely allude you?

[Dill]

(06-06-2018, 10:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So are you saying the baker was asked to bake cakes for the weddings of a male/female of folks 5 and 29 and a wedding of male/male of folks 5 and 29 or did the point absolutely allude you?

So far as I have followed this thread, you are the one who brought up the example of a 5/29 year old marriage. Not the baker in Colorado.

But if you are asking, I am pretty sure he would refuse to decorate a cake for any gay wedding, regardless of the grooms/brides ages.

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 10:34 PM)Dill Wrote: So far as I have followed this thread, you are the one who brought up the example of a 5/29 year old marriage. Not the baker in Colorado.

But if you are asking, I am pretty sure he would refuse to decorate a cake for any gay wedding, regardless of the grooms/brides ages.

I suppose your response to the question posed led me to believe you were responding to the question posed. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-06-2018, 07:51 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So he sees marriage as an act against god... if it involves gay people.

The root of it is still the sexuality of the person. 

Answer this question.

If you take the wedding part out of this, does a case still exist and go to the supreme court?

[*bfine32*]

(06-06-2018, 11:30 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Answer this question.

Oh, you don't come here much do you? 

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-06-2018, 11:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, you don't come here much do you? 

Lol.

It's been a while.

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-06-2018, 08:53 PM)Dill Wrote: If this baker's life premise is that he does what God wants, then he needs to go back to Sunday school. The Bible is the Word of God for most Christian bakers.  And I am pretty sure the Bible doesn't say anything at all about gay marriage. 

However, the God in the Bible does say it is wrong just to BE gay.

Leviticus 20: 13-15 If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

I.e., God doesn't give a darn whether gays get married or not. He wants them dead because they are gay.  The baker is not following the word of god by suffering gays to live, but just disapproving of their marriage.

Sure, the bible doesn't say "gay people can't get married" but it doesn't mean one can't discern what the bible means. 

[BmorePat87]

(06-06-2018, 08:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you have a problem with a 5 year old and 29 year old being friends? It's definitely weird

Do you have a problem with a 5 year old and a 29 year old getting married? Obviously

Is the difference the age or the relationship? Well, the only thing you actually changed was the relationship, so the difference in your questions was the relationship, but the reason why I gave the answers that I did was because of the age. 

Out of curiosity, why did you pose this question when we're discussing the root of someone's support of same sex marriages over gay marriages? The relevant rhetorical question would have been:

Does the baker have a problem with two straight people getting married?
Does the baker have a problem with two gay people  getting married?

Is the difference their sexuality or their relationship?

(06-06-2018, 11:30 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Answer this question.

If you take the wedding part out of this, does a case still exist and go to the supreme court?

I'm not sure, there's a lot of variables, but I'm leaning "yes" as I do not think Phillips' argument would actually change.

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-07-2018, 12:23 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm not sure, there's a lot of variables, but I'm leaning "yes" as I do not think Phillips' argument would actually change.

There wouldn't be a case. The baker refused to make them the cake because he didn't want to celebrate a gay wedding. 

[BmorePat87]

(06-07-2018, 12:44 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: There wouldn't be a case.

I thought you were asking a hypothetical question of would there be a case if he just discriminated on the grounds of them being gay. 

Quote:The baker refused to make them the cake because he didn't want to celebrate a gay wedding. 

Wait, what kind of wedding did he discriminate against?

[BmorePat87]

We can keep repeating this but every time you have to say it was a gay wedding.

We're having this conversation because of "gay".

[Beaker]

(06-06-2018, 11:42 AM)Dill Wrote: The other side of "capitalsim" in this case might be that more people from the 90% decide to support the baker, as happened with Chick-fil-a.

Capitalism never sorted out segregated lunch counters. Owners were happy to lose black business when they knew it would cost them more white business.  Seems like capitalism depends a whole lot on the temper of business clientele in a given time and place.  In NYC the baker's move would have likely killed his business; it might have helped it in Utah or Alabama.  

But times have changed and many more people understand and abhor the practice of discrimination. A far more likely scenario is that more of the 90% side with the people discriminated against, and the business loses more than 10%. Beyond that, 10% is not an insignificant number. If your competitors increase their business by 10% over you, they can use the additional profit to grab further market share through things like advertising, hiring additional help, etc. So in the end, you end up getting out competed by more than just 10%. Its not a static number.