First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last

Supreme Court rules 7-2 in favor of Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple

Post Reply
4507 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18

namealreadytaken wrote:

am i reading this right? in the past, a Coloado court sided with bakers refusing to make cakes with offensive messages against gay people, so the supreme court ruled it's also perfectly ok for bakers to refuse making cakes for gay couples. i probably misred it.


I'm kind of fuzzy on the details of the case myself, but from what I gather, this ruling as more to do with the specific circumstances of this case. Namely the untoward reaction of Colorado's Civil Rights commission, along with things Sundin just explained.
-OlE- 
1832 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
25 / M / Nebraska
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18

dougeprofile wrote:


qwueri wrote:

Of course, as long as someone doesn't hang a sign up front, it's totally a different thing when they practice a "straight only" business model.


But they didn’t practice a “straights only” business model - all the products in their store were available to all no matter what their orientation.


Except wedding cakes
which are a product
just saying
15709 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18
I'm reading - more like glancing over - the Court's opinion.
Phillips is described as a "good Christian" who deserved to have a "neutral and respectful" consideration of his objection to selling a cake to a gay couple, but his objection was reportedly met with great hostility by the ("evil") Colorado court, who supposedly compared Phillips so-claimed "sincere religious beliefs" with a defense for slavery and the Holocaust.

there is no court bias at all

also, i agree with Sundin that baking and selling a cake doesnt consitute a endorsement for or against gay marriage.
-OlE- 
1832 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
25 / M / Nebraska
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
It's interesting that the cake in question that caused all this hubbub doesn't really even qualify as a wedding cake imo. The cake wasn't going to be used in or after the ceremony, it was for celebrating with friends and family in Colorado before their wedding in Massachusetts. so technically its not a wedding cake, its a cake to celebrate a wedding to take place in the future. this seems like a weird thing to object to, would he make them a cake to celebrate their anniversary then or is that a no go too? The path to pastry morality is fraught with pitfalls indeed.
17766 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
23 / AH / Helipad
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
Good
4507 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18

-OlE- wrote:

It's interesting that the cake in question that caused all this hubbub doesn't really even qualify as a wedding cake imo. The cake wasn't going to be used in or after the ceremony, it was for celebrating with friends and family in Colorado before their wedding in Massachusetts. so technically its not a wedding cake, its a cake to celebrate a wedding to take place in the future. this seems like a weird thing to object to, would he make them a cake to celebrate their anniversary then or is that a no go too? The path to pastry morality is fraught with pitfalls indeed.


Oh, the case was definitely blown out of proportion. The main reason it got so much attention was the potential precedent-setting nature of the case, which ended up not materializing (sort of) Tbh, I wouldn't have bothered posting a thread on it, but this kind of trollish incitement is par the course for Ruji.
15709 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
Gorsuch: guys, you need to understand that the cake isn't just a cake. it represents something far more. the religipus bread isnt just a bread. the religious cap isnt just a cap. this pen im holding, its not just a pen.
staff: sir, im pretty sure that really is just a pen.
Gorsuch: nonsense!
staff: sir. it looks like a pen and its written 'pen' on it.
Gorsuch: why am i being met with such hostility by a ferocious individual questioning my beliefs?
87364 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
46 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18

-OlE- wrote:
Except wedding cakes
which are a product
just saying

No, cakes too! They just won’t create a cake celebrating a ceremony they have moral objections to, but all the cakes in the shop are already available for said ceremony.
4507 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18

dougeprofile wrote:

No, cakes too! They just won’t create a cake celebrating a ceremony they have moral objections to, but all the cakes in the shop are already available for said ceremony.


As Cato previously explained:


Cato_Sicarius wrote:
if his religious beliefs prevent him from treating each and every customer fairly then maybe he is in the wrong business, Even Chick-fil-A knows that you have to treat every customer fairly and evenly to the best of your ability
87364 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
46 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
They DID treat their customers fairly,
4507 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18

dougeprofile wrote:

They DID treat their customers fairly,


They denied service on the basis of their customer's sexual orientation. Not sure how that qualifies as "fairly".
87364 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
46 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
Their service is their labor guided by their convictions and the law, not their customers sexual orientations; fair.
4507 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18

dougeprofile wrote:

Their service is their labor guided by their convictions and the law, not their customers sexual orientations; fair.


And if I'm not mistaken, the law says not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, among other things, which brings us right back to where we were before.

How long do you want to keep going in circles?
12539 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/5/18
"fair"is an extremely subjective word.. It's so subjective that is should usually be left to whoever is entering the agreement to determine if he thinks it is fair. That's called the right to freedom of association
87364 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
46 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 6/4/18 , edited 6/4/18

Mishio1 wrote:
And if I'm not mistaken, the law says not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, among other things, which brings us right back to where we were before.

How long do you want to keep going in circles?

You are mistaken:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/04/supreme-court-sides-with-colorado-baker-who-refused-to-make-wedding-cake-for-same-sex-couple.html

Religious liberty must also be protected.

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.