Baker Forced to make gay wedding cakes, undergo sensitivity training, after losing lawsuit

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I believe this is the same baker who made a wedding cake for a dog wedding ceremony?

a reply to: kaylaluv

Are you serious? Do provide a link.

originally posted by: Annee

A minority wants and deserves equality.

Non-compliant businesses are destroyed because they chose to deny this minority equality.

As I said, " Who's the bully"

You are putting Christians in the position of choosing between their faith and their livelihood. We now have a judge imposing gay acceptance training classes for Christians, and pretty soon you probably won't even be able to get a business license without denouncing your faith first. I'd say you guys are the bullies.

Christians have bent over backwards to accommodate the gay community, but now they're going too far and I fear the repercussions are going to undo years of positive progress.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Annee

A minority wants and deserves equality.

Non-compliant businesses are destroyed because they chose to deny this minority equality.

As I said, " Who's the bully"

You are putting Christians in the position of choosing between their faith and their livelihood. We now have a judge imposing gay acceptance training classes for Christians, and pretty soon you probably won't even be able to get a business license without denouncing your faith first. I'd say you guys are the bullies.

Christians have bent over backwards to accommodate the gay community, but now they're going too far and I fear the repercussions are going to undo years of positive progress.

I was Christian most of my life.

There are plenty if Christians who understand equal rights.

Don't pull the persecuted Christian on me.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

In concluding that Masterpiece Cakeshop acted unlawfully, a CCRC investigation also showed evidence that Phillips was willing to bake a cake for the "marriage" of a pair of dogs, but not for two women.

abcnews.go.com...

a reply to: kaylaluv

Thank you very much.

In concluding that Masterpiece Cakeshop acted unlawfully, a CCRC investigation also showed evidence that Phillips was willing to bake a cake for the "marriage" of a pair of dogs, but not for two women.

Let's say that's true... would he bake a cake for marriage of a woman and a dog? It would be very interesting to see how that turn out lol.

A dog wedding ?

Okay too cute.

I think I'm starting to understand the judge's punishment of forcing this guy to bake the cake.... just for the irony of getting a point across.

"If yer willin' to bake a wedding cake for two dogs, yer gonna bake that damn cake for the lesbians. And you better have a big smile on yer face when yer doing it too, mister."

If I am a baker and make cakes for different occasions, but also happen to be devoutly Christian of a Fundamental Faith (since religious comparisons are popular for context), I have a scenario to consider.

If genuine and sincere Satanists come in and want a cake made in graphic relief of a sacrifice ceremony with all the proper words written in the proper order, so to speak ..should I also have to make that one so I don't offend them?

It's easy to use Christian vs. Muslim or either and Jews but principle covers all of a type not just specifics for law. That's the equal protection concept our Constitution also insures. All or nothing on a thing like this...and given my scenario? I literally DO take nothing as I'd very likely leave the business before being forced as a private effort to do something against my own personal belief system.

America never used to be a place which would ask or require such a thing either.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

No, no, no Wrabbit - we are not talking about being forced to make a product that you wouldn't normally make. What we are saying is if you specialize in tasteful white wedding cakes with flowers and doves on it and someone asks you to make that same cake with flowers and doves on it for their wedding ceremony, it doesn't matter whose wedding ceremony it's for. See the difference?

a reply to: kaylaluv

I understand exactly what you're saying and I've understood the case at hand here each time it's come up as a major topic of ATS discussion.

I still generally feel a business owner has the right to say no, in a polite and respectful way, if what they are being asked to do makes them uncomfortable. Not necessarily illegal or immoral, but uncomfortable should be enough. If a business gets to be an issue with abusing that freedom, the consumers can insure they bankrupt for lack of business being done.

Where it's state law to protect the gay community to the level of baking a cake, then the law is what it is. That's where to focus change for those who don't care for it. Where it isn't already law, at least at this silly level, I'd say resisting it is a good approach.

This is a legal position being taken on WHICH citizen comes out feeling offended or uncomfortable as opposed to wronged in some material way, and it isn't their place at all in my personal opinion.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I see your point but...

Phillips politely declined, saying he could not make a cake promoting a same-sex ceremony because of his faith. He offered to make them any other baked item they wanted.

It is unclear what is meant by this. How will making a cake PROMOTE a same-sex ceremony? Like you said it wouldn't make any difference. It sounds to me like they were requesting something different?

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
If I am a baker and make cakes for different occasions, but also happen to be devoutly Christian of a Fundamental Faith (since religious comparisons are popular for context), I have a scenario to consider.

If genuine and sincere Satanists come in and want a cake made in graphic relief of a sacrifice ceremony with all the proper words written in the proper order, so to speak ..should I also have to make that one so I don't offend them?

It's easy to use Christian vs. Muslim or either and Jews but principle covers all of a type not just specifics for law. That's the equal protection concept our Constitution also insures. All or nothing on a thing like this...and given my scenario? I literally DO take nothing as I'd very likely leave the business before being forced as a private effort to do something against my own personal belief system.

America never used to be a place which would ask or require such a thing either.

I guess the question is:

Are you in business to service the public ?
Or are you in business to service your religion ?

Because at some point one is going to clash with the other.

You're going to get all kinds of crazy stuff walking through the doors of your business. If you're not mentally capable of handling such scenarios without being so easily offended, maybe you should change careers ?

Penis cakes
Boob cakes
Divorce cakes
Lost your virginity cakes
I love Satan cakes
Bob loves Frank cakes
etc etc

What a nightmare for someone who is sensitive to such things.

a reply to: CranialSponge

I suppose it's like this... (as far as I understand?)

If you open a business that make cakes for kid's birthdays and ONLY for kids not adults. Blah blah you get the drift.

Perhaps the baker should have made it more clear?

I really do not know. I do not like religions and judgment period. But forcing the baker to go through that, ESPECIALLY HIS EMPLOYEES is going too far.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

But if black people make you uncomfortable, should you be allowed to turn black people away from your restaurant or your hotel, etc.? What if there are whole communities of people who are uncomfortable with black people or gay weddings? What if a black person or a gay person can't find an establishment in their community who will sell them products and services? You may say that's not possible, but it wasn't that long ago that this was a black person's reality. We had to enact laws forcing establishments to sell their product and service to all customers, not just white ones, or else it would probably still be a black person's reality in certain communities. Same thing with gays.

If someone feels that strongly about not selling their products or services to "certain kinds of people", maybe they shouldn't be in the business of selling to the general public, because those kinds of people have a right to be part of the general public. I'm not talking about hoodlums or thugs or murderers or thieves -- I'm talking about law-abiding people who haven't hurt anyone, but just were born being the "wrong kind of people".

a reply to: CranialSponge

Are you in business to service the public ?
Or are you in business to service your religion ?

Because at some point one is going to clash with the other.

I think the question is...is it Governments business to ever even ask that question?

The last trucking company I hauled freight for was unashamedly Christian. On the back of their trailers they had large sticker/signs with Christian messages. I've also worked for Covenant Transport. Another trucking company hauling for the general public. Covenant means what it says and they chose it to represent their Covenant with God for the building of their company.

If a baker wants to run a shop with a religious lean, it should be his right and without having to explain that. If it's in an area of like minded people, it will do well, and such things always have. If it's an area without like minded people, it won't do well at all and will fail, as they always have as well.

We're at the fundamental basis of a free nation, as it really seems to be coming as a conflict of basic ideals these days. Ideals clashing over top of specific issues, but the ideals are what matter above any one issue, IMO.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: CranialSponge

I suppose it's like this... (as far as I understand?)

If you open a business that make cakes for kid's birthdays and ONLY for kids not adults. Blah blah you get the drift.

Perhaps the baker should have made it more clear?

I really do not know. I do not like religions and judgment period. But forcing the baker to go through that, ESPECIALLY HIS EMPLOYEES is going too far.

I agree with your sentiments about the judge forcing the employees to also take on the burden of their employers punishment. Employees have to follow the orders of their employers or risk losing their jobs, it's not willful fowl play.

Any law breaking should fall only on the law breaker's shoulders, not the people in his employ.

I'm scratching my head at why the judge added that into his sentencing.

They're not gay wedding cakes they're just wedding cakes. Who cares who eats the damn cake?

I don't agree with anyone being made to attend any sort of education situation because of this, though.

a reply to: kaylaluv

But if black people make you uncomfortable, should you be allowed to turn black people away from your restaurant or your hotel, etc.?

That's a mighty big Red Herring you drag across the discussion there, and neither Religion nor Gay rights have ANYTHING to do with Civil Rights in this nation where it's made people equal on terms of Race. Bringing that into any discussion is akin to the Nazi card, and the Race card never looks good for the emotional impact it usually adds where none is needed.

This isn't about refusing someone on race, and I also worded what I said carefully to say that a business owner should have the right to politely, and respectfully refuse service. If they can't manage to be polite and respectful, then they've likely crossed other lines of public humiliation and being Gay isn't necessary but is more than covered in anyone being mistreated.

* As also noted before .. Where this is specifically covered by law, then that IS the law there and what has to be followed. Personal belief or not, and that has to cut both ways or not at all.

originally posted by: buster2010

Also as I posted earlier it is not against the Christian faith to do business with gays.

And you are correct, its not against the Christian faith to do business with gays, but it is against the Christian faith to knowingly participate and profit from a gay marriage or civil union.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Red herring it may well be, but it's very relevant.