Posted on 01/09/2014 2:37:09 AM PST by markomalley
Several recent court cases have resulted in small business owners, who create the wares and services that they sell, being ordered by a judge to sell their custom-made products (e.g., wedding cakes and floral arrangements) or services (e.g., wedding photography) to gay couples despite the small business owners' refusal to do so based on their religious principles.
If the business in question sold standard, mass-produced items, such as rings, then denying gay couples the right to purchase such things would be clearly discriminatory in the same way that a realtor would be discriminating if they refused to show a house that was for sale to any and all interested potential buyers. The sexual orientation of the buyers should not be an issue in that sort of transaction.
However, the sensitivities of gay couples who claim to feel slighted is not the real issue. The plaintiff in a recent wedding cake related suit, one David Mullins, is reported to have said:
Being denied service by Masterpiece Cakeshop [the defendant] was offensive and dehumanizing especially in the midst of arranging what should be a joyful family celebration.
While vigorously defending the plaintiffs' claims that they have a right not to be offended, the judge, the ACLU, and others in the LGBT community seem to be ignoring (in this particular case) the rights of the baker who chose not to fulfill the plaintiffs' request.
Most people would immediately think of the 1st Amendment's protection of freedom of religion, but in truth that is not the most relevant part of the Constitution here. It is the 13th Amendment, Section 1, which should be the controlling part of the legal debate in this situation.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
What you’re saying is you don’t understand the Catholic Catechism nor the Constitution nor the issue at hand
The Catechism states that homosexual acts are sinful but being a homosexual is not sinful My stylist has a God given talent and is an artist. He knows I am a practicing Catholic and he knows that if or when he asks me i will tell him what the Church says about it and that ill do so in a charitable manner, as a fellow sinner but one who strives not to be
He knows that if he wants to go to church that ill go with him
Nowhere in the Catechism does it say to shun people in hope that they will want to be as holy as you
I don’t interpret giving money for appropriate services for which God gave them the aptitude for, to or being charitable to homosexuals as people providing a service as sinful
The issue yore wrong on is the homosexual activist situation.
I go out of my way to avoid businesses who demand that I accept homosexual practices as normal, or who want some kind of equality or exaltation for having a homosexual lifestyle and want even children to learn about sex practices when they are too young to handle the information of normal much less abnormal sex
Giving money to the cause when they don’t ever see or appreciate my view I will not do. So I avoid Disney, wouldn’t go to d world for anything, Home Depot, give to BSA and their sponsors- AT&T
The gay militants have no lids and two militants in a household in the case of a union. They have nothing better to do or spend theira eu on than going after people for discrimination. Where they can prove it, they’ll find it
The baker has better or other things to spend his time and money on so he’ll lose the case because he is discriminating. Whether his discrimination is for a good purpose or not he is discriminating
I guess I got it from being in health care. We would not discriminate in providing health care to anyone including aids patients. If we wanted to not provide service we would have to go into another business
The cake guy can charitably make the guys a cake and say to them they’re wrong in their lifestyle but he’s not going to win this case. He can’t say his religious beliefs are being intruded on. Disapproval of behavior is not enough
Another distinction is that “public accomodations” typically refer to restaurants and motels/hotels.
People, as a general rule, need to sleep at least once a day and eat several times a day. Every day.
Wedding cakes, on the other hand, are a once-in-a-great-while item, with a multi-month lead time; there’s plenty of time to look for alternative suppliers.
In this case, as others have mentioned, the “happy couple” probably went through a long list of bakers before they found one who didn’t want to make them a cake, so they’d have something to complain about.
This post makes me feel like I’ve entered the Twilight Zone.
Congress should pass a law requiring every person to buy 1 wedding cake per year, whether or not they are getting married.
No you don't! You've been supporting one for years! You normalize it because, to quote you, "We don’t talk about certain things...". Sticking your head in the sand is normalizing it no matter how much you deny it! Since you won't spend your $$ at Disney, Home Depot, etc, you are a total hypocrite for spending $$ at your homosexual hair stylist. I'd even bet you've recommended him to your friends!
IMO, this falls under where Jesus said, "render unto Caesar what is his." Doesn't mean you have to like, but civil laws and regulations are Caesar's.
The baker should state that he only bakes cakes with a male groom and a female bride at the top. Any alterations to that norm would be considered a special order and have an associated expense, which could be made such that the prospective couple would look elsewhere for cake baking services. End of case.
Well, I don’t make up some random interpretation of my religion that suits my emotional reaction to things
The catechism sply does not promote the blind hatred that you are illustrating with your attitude
Nor does the constitution nor does a healthy culture
So bring it elsewhere
So your interpretation of your religion allows you to hate/ not support Disney et al because they support homosexual lifestyles but allows you to support/love your homosexual hair stylist.. what hypocrisy. And no, none of my posts have exhibited “blind hatred”.
Yup . Thinking of the “ stink hand” scene in Mall Rats....
Completely different than health care or regular commerce.
Bake the cake. And have them write the check to “ Reverand “ Fred Phelps, Westboro Baptist Church. Two can play this game...
The better approach is that recommended by another freeper, which is to publicly announce the donation of the profits to groups promoting homosexual to heterosexual conversion therapy.
That would almost guarantee a boycott of your business by the gays.
Yep.
Why not "all profits from this cake will be donated to ..."
Ted Cruz
Tea Party groups
Thomas More Law Center
National Organization for Marriage
Etc.
No. He has a dilemma ; the one we’re talking about.
I would not want to participate in a homosexual marriage by selling them a cake. And I would say, ‘no, I don’t want to participate in that’
But the law, the court, is determining that I don’t have that right. So now I have to either close up shop, because now its not going to stop there, I’m a target now, if my law team hasn’t already bled me out, or I sell them the cake after losing in court, or without going to court
So now I have to consult the catechism, which is going to tell me that to do business in a charitable manner within the law.
If it tells me not to participate, then I have a freedom of religion case on my hands, which It doesn’t tell me, or I’d be in the same place as the nuns, which is before the Supreme Court against the pres, which this baker is not
So it’s a personal discrimination situation which he can either deal with or switch professions
No. I do not hate Disney.
The defining factor is militancy. I do not want my miney to be used by Disney to promote the cultural change they are attempting and I am allowed to not participate in that
The courts have determined that it is not religious infringement to make these guys a cake.
The court is likely correct
And I would sell these guys a cake and tell them what I think about it. Is sure have a crucifix in my establishment and I’d have an image of the Blessed Mother. And I’d have no hatred for them. They are wrong and misguided by a complacent public, among other things
The hatred preached here in some posts is completely ineffective.
Christians cannot hate Its against their religion
The constitution says whatever the judges say it says this week.
The big mistake that the bakers made was in having a retail location. Having a retail store is like putting a sign out that says STEAL FROM ME! Why do you need a retail store to bake wedding cakes? Better to do it by word of mouth and not deal with the official and unofficial theft. Plus it greatly lowers overhead.
I think a better alternative is to simply do business quietly by word of mouth or internet.
You’d get sued and do jail time for the Ex-Lax or other types of tricks. That’s considered poisoning someone now days. Just make them a cake to their order but don’t put your heart into it or do anything extra. What’re they going to do, go running to the judge like little crybabies? Show the court that you did exactly what they asked of you and you should be fine. And charge them what you normally charge anyone else for that cake, no more or less. My mother and her best friend baked & decorated wedding and birthday cakes back in the 1960’s and 70’s, so I’m a little familiar with that business. Same goes for the flowers. Just give ‘em what they ordered. Just pretend it’s for a funeral, because it is, sort of.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.