On Cracker Barrel, Gay Wedding Cakes, and First Amendment Freedoms

Townhall.com ^ | June 29, 2019 | Michele Blood

[DoodleDawg]

In Phillips’ situation at Masterpiece Cakeshop, his closely held belief was that it is wrong to use his artistic talents to promote gay marriage. In Cracker Barrel’s case, the closely held belief is that it is wrong (not to mention bad for business) to knowingly provide space and service to hateful people who advocate for others’ death.

The difference being that sexual orientation is protected by state anti-discrimination laws and hateful people are not.

[Kaslin]

true

[teeman8r]

Living in a free society, with the freedom to pursue happiness, means we have a right to discriminate. Most will not, but others should be free to do so.

[I want the USA back]

I’ll take all this seriously when they start fining m*slims for refusing to bake cakes for gays and for refusing service to people with dogs.

Until the favoritism and a$$ kissing of m*slims stops, it’s all bull$hit.

[suthener]

Logic? We don’t need no stinking logic.

[foreverfree]

Bump

[NativeSon]

These “conundrums” present themselves because of anti-discrimination laws & actions.

Each anti constitutional law put in place begets 10 “to fix” it (law).

We can call it whatever we wish but where ever the gubmint picks the winner and the loser, we all lose.

[McBuff]

It's apples and oranges. . .it's not the same. The issue is can a person (Phillips) be FORCED into a contract (to bake a cake) that violates his conscience. Change it to a Jewish baker being forced to bake a cake decorated with Nazi symbols. Or a African-American baker being force to bake a cake that exalts the Klan. Phillips is not refusing service to customers because of who they are or what they believe. . .anyone can enter his bakery and purchase any item for sale. He is refusing to be forced into a contract to produce a product that violates his moral conscience.

Cracker Barrel, on the other hand, is refusing service because of someone's beliefs. This is clearly wrong but it also demonstrates how easily confused the issue can be.

[Still Thinking]

Hammer, meet nail.

[Richard Kimball]

. .anyone can enter his bakery and purchase any item for sale. He is refusing to be forced into a contract to produce a product that violates his moral conscience.

This.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

So, if a black person comes into Masterpiece Cakes and tries to order a cake for a "Kill the Crackers" Party then Jack must bake the cake because blacks are a protected class?

How about a woman ordering a "Happy Abortion" cake?

Abortion is "the law of the land" after all.

Either you can refuse a commission for any reason or you can not. If you can not then many acts of criminal activity against you are legal as long as they leave a quarter. They were just "forcing a commission."

People have used this argument when it comes to hookers, saying they can not be raped because they sell sex.

I think the argument is a bunch of hooey because you can decline commissions. And so the law has found.

[Manly Warrior]

I suppose it matters to ask “ do you agree?”.

[ontap]

The guy has said all along he would sell a cake to any one he just won't advance their ideology!!

[miss marmelstein]

Who wants to eat at Cracker Barrel?

[OrangeHoof]

Jack Phillips *is* his business while Cracker Barrel is a publicly-held company. I’m sure Cracker Barrel has a policy where they have the right to refuse service to anyone whose dress or behavior is incompatible with the company’s need for cleanliness and order.

Cracker Barrel could deny Mr. Fritts the use of their property for their group events the same way Phillips could deny gays from staging a wedding in his bakery. But they can’t deny *individuals* who come solely to eat access to his restaurant if they are not trying to draw attention to themselves. Likewise, gays are welcome to buy cakes from Mr. Phillips. They just can’t force him to put objectionable messages on the cake.

[Don W]

The difference *I* see is that refusing to work for someone is somewhat different from calling for their violent death.

But that’s just me.

[Paal Gulli]

When founder Danny Evins was alive, CBRL always stood its ground against the LGBT-WTF fascists and the race-mongering poverty pimps. But not any more.

"Who wants to eat at Cracker Barrel?"

The company is valued at $4 billion USD and operates 645 stores in 44 states, so the answer to that question is ...lots of folks.

[xzins]

Actually, Phillips did serve homosexuals. He just wouldn’t paint them a specialty cake.

Cracker Barrel, to be the same as Phillips, would have to serve the guy anything on the regular menu and only refuse to put “death penalty for gays” in whipping cream on a large pancake.

[miss marmelstein]

Yes, lots of folks have no taste buds.