Bakery gets discrimination complaint over refusal to write anti-gay messages on cake

  • metta

    Posts: 39133

    Jan 17, 2015 6:13 PM GMT
    Bakery gets discrimination complaint over refusal to write anti-gay messages on cake


    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/01/bakery-gets-discrimination-complaint-over-refusal-to-write-anti-gay-messages-on-cake/


    I don't think that discrimination is a protected class.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jan 17, 2015 7:15 PM GMT
    What they should have done was accepted the job and then wrote "Fuck Bigots" on the cake and gave it to them, take-it-or-leave-it your choice. And refusing to write a specific message on a cake is not discrimination. The gov't would not allow you to buy a license plate that says 'FUKFAGS' or 'FKCRSTNS', neither does a business have to be forced to write what they don't consider ethical.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 8:25 PM GMT
    So he came back and was causing trouble. Technically once you use the attorney card, it's "your lawyers talk to our lawyers. Bye."
    They should have called the police and have him escorted off the property.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 8:26 PM GMT
    OK. But what if the KKK comes to town and wants your catering business to provide them with lunch?
    Or Westboro Baptist folks want to spend the night in your bed and breakfast?
    If I was buying a wedding cake I wouldn't want it from a company who's owners didn't like gays! What if they shit in the chocolate layers?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 9:32 PM GMT
    Wyndahoi saidOK. But what if the KKK comes to town and wants your catering business to provide them with lunch?
    Or Westboro Baptist folks want to spend the night in your bed and breakfast?
    If I was buying a wedding cake I wouldn't want it from a company who's owners didn't like gays! What if they shit in the chocolate layers?


    ‘Religious Liberty’ Does Not Give People a License to Discriminate

    https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/lgbt/news/2012/10/15/41517/religious-liberty-does-not-give-people-a-license-to-discriminate/


    Even the ACLU defended the KKK in Skokie IL. For the freedom to march. It wasn't to defend harassing a Jewish deli owner/caterer.

    Bed and Breakfast are a little different in most states because it is your home. BUT be careful if you are homophobic:
    "Diane Cervelli and Taeko Bufford, a lesbian couple, were turned away by Aloha Bed & Breakfast in Hawaii during a trip to visit their close friend and her newborn baby. The owner of the bed and breakfast explicitly stated that same-sex relationships were “detestable,” and that they “defile our land.” For this reason, the owner denied the couple accommodations at her hotel, which stands in clear violation of Hawaii’s public accommodation law prohibiting any hotel or “other establishment that provides lodging to transient guests” from discriminating based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ancestry, or disability."

    As for the cake, or any product, they are to provide equal public accommodations (depending on state/locality).

    "In the Elane case, a professional photographer in New Mexico refused to take pictures of a same-sex couple’s commitment ceremony, arguing that doing so was a violation of her religious freedoms. As expected, the New Mexico Court of Appeals found that doing so did not harm the photographer’s religious liberties but instead that her refusal constituted a clear violation of the state’s Human Rights Act, which prohibits discriminating in areas of public accommodation on the basis of sexual orientation."

    If the photographer or the cake decorator put gay derogatory comments on/in the photos or cake there would be additional (worse IMHO) charges. It becomes an active case of hate.

    This Bible Thumper is out of line.

    "Opponents of gay rights have historically undermined equality and fairness for gay Americans by directly attacking gay people themselves. But as the public has become more accepting of gay individuals, this tactic has become less and less successful. For this reason, opponents of equality are hiding behind the guise of “religious liberty” to perpetuate a discriminatory and unequal legal environment for gay people."

    Hate is a protected right. It's free speech. But to force or coerce someone else to say something hateful (or put on a cake) is another matter.

    I'd counter sue!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 9:42 PM GMT
    more coverage http://outfrontonline.com/news/pro-lgbt-baker-slapped-religious-discrimination-complaint/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 9:55 PM GMT
    They did it last month too.

    They wanted "Gay Marriage is Wrong" on a cake.

    Sounds like forced Hate Speech to me!
    But it's SHOCKING news!


    http://joemiller.us/2014/12/shocking-video-christian-man-asks-13-gay-bakeries-bake-pro-traditional-marriage-cake-said-no/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 17, 2015 10:47 PM GMT
    I'd let them have their cake. They're obviously demented Right Wingers, and denying them their cake will not change their sick minds.

    Rather, one should pity Republicans who would celebrate cutting and eating such a cake.
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 3385

    Jan 19, 2015 6:50 AM GMT
    ^^ perhaps that makes you not an artist but a whore? icon_twisted.gif
  • mwolverine

    Posts: 3385

    Jan 19, 2015 7:00 AM GMT
    timmm55 saidThey wanted "Gay Marriage is Wrong" on a cake.
    Sounds like forced Hate Speech to me!

    I'm not sure it's "Hate Speech" (even if I obviously disagree).

    If a bakery can be legally compelled to write "Gay Marriage is Right" on a cake, at a time that there is a political debate over the matter, then how can they not similarly be compelled to provide the opposite message?

    In this case, though, it seems as if the troublemaker wanted much more than a political message, including "God Hates Homosexuals" (I suspect that's an edit from "God Hates Fags"). So I would agree that it's "hate speech", especially given the use of the word "hate". But isn't "hate speech" in the USA protected free speech?

    I think I'd circumvent the issue by having a rate structure in place:
    Cost for a message: $1,000.
    Discount for loving message: $990.

    So for that troublemaker, I'd take his $1,000 and (to not feel like a whore, as per my previous post), donate it to the appropriate charity that counters that hate message (e.g. NAACP if it was a racist message, ADL if it were Anti-Semitic, HRC if anti-gay, etc.).

    Lastly, that troublemaker sounds like a Phelpsite. Seeking confrontation (e.g. by protesting at funerals) and provoking someone to do something on which they can capitalize legally.