Masterpiece Cakeshop back to court.

[Harmonian Hegemony]

[edit]

[Harmonian Hegemony]

His 'convictions' are irrelevant. He refused to serve her because she was trans. That is discrimination regardless of what you or any other self-hating gay homophobe says.

How many times do we have to go through this? He refused the cake because he disagreed with the message, not because she's trans.

As soon as she said she was trans he refused to do it. Had she been cis he would have done it. Ergo he discriminated against her because she was trans.

As he was all set to make it before finding out she was not cis I call bullshit.

He was all set to make it until he found out the message.

They're was no message. It was to celebrate her coming out.

Then maybe he shouldn't be a baker.

He shouldn't be a baker because he is doing legal stuff?

Because he's refusing to make cakes for people based on their sexuality and/or gender identity.

>sides with a homophobe, defends a homophobe

>gets pissy when someone calls them a homophobe

He's defending the homophobe's right to not be compelled to speak.

He should be compelled to do his fucking job. If he doesn't want to do it then he should stop being a baker.

Art is considered speech, and he didn't like the message the art had, so he refused to make the cake.

No, he refused to make the cake because he is a bigot who hates trans people.

Unless you don't believe homophobes have the same rights as everyone else?

They shouldn't have the right to discriminate.

[The Two Jerseys]

Some people in this thread really seem to like strawmen.

>sides with a homophobe, defends a homophobe

>gets pissy when someone calls them a homophobe

Care to make an actual argument, or are you just going to make personal attacks against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

[Estanglia]

How many times do we have to go through this? He refused the cake because he disagreed with the message, not because she's trans.

As soon as she said she was trans he refused to do it. Had she been cis he would have done it. Ergo he discriminated against her because she was trans.

As soon as she expressed the message that the cake was to celebrate her coming out he refused it. The only way this would be because she is trans is if he offered coming out cakes for cis people.

He was all set to make it until he found out the message.

They're was no message. It was to celebrate her coming out.

That is the message.

He shouldn't be a baker because he is doing legal stuff?

Because he's refusing to make cakes for people based on their sexuality and/or gender identity.

He still hasn't broken the law. He is allowed to refuse commissions (which it was) and cannot be compelled to speak (as I've already said, the cake's message is speech).

He's defending the homophobe's right to not be compelled to speak.

He should be compelled to do his fucking job. If he doesn't want to do it then he should stop being a baker.

He cannot be compelled to speak. That's what would happen if he was forced to accept all commissions. He was still willing to bake the cake up until he found out the message.

Art is considered speech, and he didn't like the message the art had, so he refused to make the cake.

No, he refused to make the cake because he is a bigot who hates trans people.

He refused because he didn't like the message.

Unless you don't believe homophobes have the same rights as everyone else?

They shouldn't have the right to discriminate.

They do because you cannot compel someone to speak or to accept your commission. This doesn't just apply to the homophobe. Should a gay baker who was asked to make an anti-gay cake be forced to make it? Or a secular baker who'a asked to make a pro-creationism cake?

[Bombadil]

*snip*

What parsing bullshit.. break down the message.. was he against celebrations, I don't think so.. was he against coming out.. if she'd embraced her inner clown, thrown away a lucrative banking job and taken up clowning would that be cause to refuse.. or was it specifically due to being transgender.

You can't just sit and go 'it was the message' when the message was intrinsically tied to who she was, and it was that which he objected to (actually the wife refused it not the baker.. just for accuracy).

And you cannot categorically state 'it's just a message' when the courts haven't decided on this yet. As noted earlier it's the fine point at which freedom of speech - or the right not to be compelled to say something - comes up against discrimination, excluding a specific class of people simply due to who they are.

In fact the very point is whether a blue and pink cake can be a message in and of itself when anyone might order such a thing. There was no message written on the cake, no image of a man changing to a woman.. nothing, just a blue and pink cake that was for a celebration. One could argue the celebration, not the cake, was the message and the cake's just a cake.

Don't say something is categorically a thing when it's not, because it's really just your opinion.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

If this from the wikipedia article is true though,

A nationwide and state-by-state poll on the issue conducted throughout 2017 by the Public Religion Research Institute as part of the annual American Values Atlas survey revealed that 60% of Americans, including a majority or plurality in every state, opposed allowing religiously-based refusals of services or products to gay people by small business owners (colloquially known as "the baker's exception"), while 33% supported allowing such religiously-based refusal, and 7% had no opinion.

that is quite a majority of people in favour of ending the baker's exception.

[Harmonian Hegemony]

>sides with a homophobe, defends a homophobe

>gets pissy when someone calls them a homophobe

Care to make an actual argument,

I have been.

or are you just going to make personal attacks against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

I'm not attacking you. Just pointing out your homophobia.

[Estanglia]

or are you just going to make personal attacks against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

I'm not attacking you. Just pointing out your homophobia.

How is he being homophobic? I know that the baker's situation is in a grey area, but Two Jerseys hasn't gone around saying anything homophobic.

[Holy Tedalonia]

Everybody and their "the cake has meaning!" Talk.

Let's put this to the basic level, cake is a product, Baker is religious person, and customer is person who Baker doesn't agree with in views.

Now let's put it through various potential yet different incarnations.
Trans Cake, Religious Baker, Trans Customer
Nazi Cake, Jewish Baker, Nazi Customer
Trump Cake, Liberal Baker, MAGA customer
Birthday Cake, Chinese Baker, Rape of Nanking Japanese War Veteran
Etc...

At some point some people will simply not make a cake for the other side.

Hell, if I was Chinese I wouldn't bake a cake for a Japanese soldier from the Rape of Nanking.

[Knask]

Someone asked me to paint their house green once, but I couldn't do it due to my religious views. I don't think anybody here would have condoned the message sent by creating such a piece of art.

[Harmonian Hegemony]

I'm not attacking you. Just pointing out your homophobia.

How is he being homophobic? I know that the baker's situation is in a grey area, but Two Jerseys hasn't gone around saying anything homophobic.

By supporting a homophobe.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Yep. I'm a member of the LGBT community myself and my issue here is with compelled speech. Do I think this guy is a dick? Yeah. It's, IMO, just a cake. But on the same token, he sees his creations as art, plus, he has a right to reserve the right to not make custom cakes that celebrate or carry messages that conflict with his religious convictions.

His 'convictions' are irrelevant. He refused to serve her because she was trans. That is discrimination regardless of what you or any other self-hating gay homophobe says.

Scardina wanted a custom cake to celebrate her birthday (no problem there) and to celebrate the 7 year anniversary of her coming out as transgender, by her admission (not really an issue to me, but that is something that goes against the baker's religious convictions). To force him to make a cake for Scardina is what I am against of. His religious convictions tell him there are only two genders and you can't change that.

Again, his religion is not relevant. Him disrespecting a trans woman by denying her service is.

Scardina was not denied service, what she was denied was to have a custom cake made by this man. She could have bought any of the other cakes available, just not one custom made by this man.

As he was all set to make it before finding out she was not cis I call bullshit.

And maybe he has no case, like some have said. Maybe he's doing this out of being an ass. Forcing him to make a custom cake that celebrates something he doesn't agree with it as per his religious convictions is not the way to go either.

Then maybe he shouldn't be a baker.

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

[Vassenor]

His 'convictions' are irrelevant. He refused to serve her because she was trans. That is discrimination regardless of what you or any other self-hating gay homophobe says.



Again, his religion is not relevant. Him disrespecting a trans woman by denying her service is.



As he was all set to make it before finding out she was not cis I call bullshit.



Then maybe he shouldn't be a baker.

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

[Galloism]

In fact the very point is whether a blue and pink cake can be a message in and of itself when anyone might order such a thing. There was no message written on the cake, no image of a man changing to a woman.. nothing, just a blue and pink cake that was for a celebration. One could argue the celebration, not the cake, was the message and the cake's just a cake.

Which is also true of the “armored man holding a rifle” cake.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

The service is there, just not for messages he's not in agreement with. When Scardina said this cake was to also celebrate the 7th anniversary of her coming out as transgender, that particular message is not something this guy is in agreement with, so he declined to make the cake.

[Grinning Dragon]

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

Custom work is an additional service a proprietor offers. A customer is not entitled to custom work and the proprietor can refuse said custom work.

[Galloism]

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

Have you read the legal arguments I’ve posted to you multiple times yet, or are you just going to ignore them because it’s inconvenient.

Heck, if we accept it’s discrimination (which it is after a fashion), that isn’t definitive in of itself. We discriminate all the time, and most discrimination is legal.

For instance, my lawyer on retainer must have a law degree and be admitted to the bar in both states in which I do business. Does that cut out some lawyers? Sure. Does it cut out a lot of other people who aren’t lawyers? All of them. This IS a discrimination of sorts, and a completely legal one.

[Holy Tedalonia]

It's clear you don't understand the issues here. I can get this guy is acting like a twat but compelled speech is not free and you're basically saying we force him to take commissions for people whose messages he is not in agreement with here.

The bakery didn't refuse Scardina services. Just not a custom cake made by this man. How many times must we repeat this? But I suppose pointing that out makes us homophobes. So be it.

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

So, I can go into a cake shop with my custom made MAGA hat (that I inherited for some reason) and asked, "can you make me a cake wall, and can it say, 'deport dem illegalz now!' Don't worry about the payment, Mexico can pay for it."

And they'll make it?

[Hirota]

Everybody and their "the cake has meaning!" Talk.

Let's put this to the basic level, cake is a product, Baker is religious person, and customer is person who Baker doesn't agree with in views.

Now let's put it through various potential yet different incarnations.
Trans Cake, Religious Baker, Trans Customer
Nazi Cake, Jewish Baker, Nazi Customer
Trump Cake, Liberal Baker, MAGA customer
Birthday Cake, Chinese Baker, Rape of Nanking Japanese War Veteran
Etc...

At some point some people will simply not make a cake for the other side.

Hell, if I was Chinese I wouldn't bake a cake for a Japanese soldier from the Rape of Nanking.

I agree. Too much petty tribalism and lazy overuse of association fallacy in play here. But for better or worse, this world of petty identity politics is the one of our own collective making.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

So custom work isn't a service any more? Because I still do not see how "but he offered other things" magically makes this not discrimination.

Have you read the legal arguments I’ve posted to you multiple times yet, or are you just going to ignore them because it’s inconvenient.

Heck, if we accept it’s discrimination (which it is after a fashion), that isn’t definitive in of itself. We discriminate all the time, and most discrimination is legal.

For instance, my lawyer on retainer must have a law degree and be admitted to the bar in both states in which I do business. Does that cut out some lawyers? Sure. Does it cut out a lot of other people who aren’t lawyers? All of them. This IS a discrimination of sorts, and a completely legal one.

I think we're in agreement that this guy is coming across as a dick, the baker. But no one should be compelled to speak like this. Scardina has rights, but so does the baker. And as much of a dick as I find him for refusing to custom make this cake, I realize he can do that.

[Bombadil]

In fact the very point is whether a blue and pink cake can be a message in and of itself when anyone might order such a thing. There was no message written on the cake, no image of a man changing to a woman.. nothing, just a blue and pink cake that was for a celebration. One could argue the celebration, not the cake, was the message and the cake's just a cake.

Which is also true of the “armored man holding a rifle” cake.

Perhaps, I feel that slides over a border, that it notches up potential meaning over just a blue and pink cake.. or a white and purple cake.. or whatever.. adding a: a man and b: a gun reduces the potential neutrality of message.. and that reduction, as tiny as it might be.. can be interpreted as forcing someone in terms of speech over just a cake of two colours.

Maybe two colours is the border.. maybe just one colour is no meaning in and of itself enough that it's discriminatory to refuse to make that cake for a specific class of people, where the class of people is more distinct than the message.

..but I don't think a figure of a man holding a gun is the same as a two tone cake alone, with no figurine and no written message.

[Galloism]

Which is also true of the “armored man holding a rifle” cake.

Perhaps, I feel that slides over a border, that it notches up potential meaning over just a blue and pink cake.. or a white and purple cake.. or whatever.. adding a: a man and b: a gun reduces the potential neutrality of message.. and that reduction, as tiny as it might be.. can be interpreted as forcing someone in terms of speech over just a cake of two colours.

Maybe two colours is the border.. maybe just one colour is no meaning in and of itself enough that it's discriminatory to refuse to make that cake for a specific class of people, where the class of people is more distinct than the message.

..but I don't think a figure of a man holding a gun is the same as a two tone cake alone, with no figurine and no written message.

How about a three tone cake?

[Galloism]

Have you read the legal arguments I’ve posted to you multiple times yet, or are you just going to ignore them because it’s inconvenient.

Heck, if we accept it’s discrimination (which it is after a fashion), that isn’t definitive in of itself. We discriminate all the time, and most discrimination is legal.

For instance, my lawyer on retainer must have a law degree and be admitted to the bar in both states in which I do business. Does that cut out some lawyers? Sure. Does it cut out a lot of other people who aren’t lawyers? All of them. This IS a discrimination of sorts, and a completely legal one.

I think we're in agreement that this guy is coming across as a dick, the baker. But no one should be compelled to speak like this. Scardina has rights, but so does the baker. And as much of a dick as I find him for refusing to custom make this cake, I realize he can do that.

Pretty much.

Just as if a person made custom clothing back during the Vietnam war and refused to make plain black armbands because they didn’t agree with the message. They’d probably be kind of a dick, but I’m loathe to compel people to make symbols carrying messages they don’t agree with.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Which is also true of the “armored man holding a rifle” cake.

Perhaps, I feel that slides over a border, that it notches up potential meaning over just a blue and pink cake.. or a white and purple cake.. or whatever.. adding a: a man and b: a gun reduces the potential neutrality of message.. and that reduction, as tiny as it might be.. can be interpreted as forcing someone in terms of speech over just a cake of two colours.

Maybe two colours is the border.. maybe just one colour is no meaning in and of itself enough that it's discriminatory to refuse to make that cake for a specific class of people, where the class of people is more distinct than the message.

..but I don't think a figure of a man holding a gun is the same as a two tone cake alone, with no figurine and no written message.

Imagine you own a hair salon. You, Bombadil, offer custom hairstyles additionally to just your off the mill haircuts. I come in and ask you to dye my hair red, leaving a portion in the crown black and then I want you to fashion that portion into a swastika because, and I add on my request "I'm celebrating the 70th anniversary of Nazis killing Jews". That's the message I'm conveying with my hair. I just told you that's why I want one of the custom haircuts you offer. You happen to disagree with my message, on moral, political or religious grounds and you refuse to give me that custom hairstyle. You can offer me your other services, which are off the mill hair cuts, but you won't give me the custom hairstyle I asked for because you oppose the message it gives. Should you be forced to give me this hairstyle against your convictions?

[Holy Tedalonia]

Perhaps, I feel that slides over a border, that it notches up potential meaning over just a blue and pink cake.. or a white and purple cake.. or whatever.. adding a: a man and b: a gun reduces the potential neutrality of message.. and that reduction, as tiny as it might be.. can be interpreted as forcing someone in terms of speech over just a cake of two colours.

Maybe two colours is the border.. maybe just one colour is no meaning in and of itself enough that it's discriminatory to refuse to make that cake for a specific class of people, where the class of people is more distinct than the message.

..but I don't think a figure of a man holding a gun is the same as a two tone cake alone, with no figurine and no written message.

Imagine you own a hair salon. You, Bombadil, offer custom hairstyles additionally to just your off the mill haircuts. I come in and ask you to dye my hair red, leaving a portion in the crown black and then I want you to fashion that portion into a swastika because, and I add on my request "I'm celebrating the 70th anniversary of Nazis killing Jews". That's the message I'm conveying with my hair. I just told you that's why I want one of the custom haircuts you offer. You happen to disagree with my message, on moral, political or religious grounds and you refuse to give me that custom hairstyle. You can offer me your other services, which are off the mill hair cuts, but you won't give me the custom hairstyle I asked for because you oppose the message it gives. Should you be forced to give me this hairstyle against your convictions?

Oh no, Its the forest swastika's all over again!