A wedding cake is an ‘artistic expression’ that a baker may deny to a same-sex couple, Calif. judge rules

Didge wrote:Forcing a baker to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage over her religious objections violates her right to free speech, a California judge has ruled.

“A wedding cake is not just a cake in a Free Speech analysis,” wrote Superior Court Judge David R. Lampe in a decision late Monday. “It is an artistic expression by the person making it that is to be used traditionally as a centerpiece in the celebration of a marriage. There could not be a greater form of expressive conduct,” he said.

As a result, a state anti-discrimination law, which applies to all kinds of other goods and services, does not apply to the baker, who lives in Bakersfield.

The judge’s reasoning is similar to that of the “cake artist” awaiting a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. In that case, Jack C. Phillips, a Colorado baker, is arguing that the First Amendment’s free speech and free exercise of religion clauses give him the right to refuse wedding services to a same-sex couple, despite public accommodations laws that require businesses that are open to the public to treat all potential customers equally. The court heard arguments in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission in December.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.


SOURCE WASHINGTON POST

Raggamuffin wrote:This fuss about wedding cakes is absurd. How many cakes is it now?

Maddog wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:This fuss about wedding cakes is absurd. How many cakes is it now?

What is happening is gay couples are targeting small bakeries.  

They will ignore 20 bakeries that don't have a problem with baking a cake with two goats fucking, if that's what you want.  No one in the US is having any issues getting a damn cake.  

Raggamuffin wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:This fuss about wedding cakes is absurd. How many cakes is it now?

What is happening is gay couples are targeting small bakeries.  

They will ignore 20 bakeries that don't have a problem with baking a cake with two goats fucking, if that's what you want.  No one in the US is having any issues getting a damn cake.  

They need to grow up then. It's about time someone told them to stop being silly.

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They need to grow up then. It's about time someone told them to stop being silly.

Exactly if the baker can't stop being silly then they should not be running a business
they need to grow up and stop letting their favourite fariytale impede their capacity to run a business to the standards expected by society.

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They need to grow up then. It's about time someone told them to stop being silly.

Exactly if the baker can't stop being silly then they should not be running a business
they need to grow up and stop letting their favourite fariytale impede their capacity to run a business to the standards expected by society.

Or you could just let people be silly at let the marketplace decide.

You never cease to amaze me on how much you like to stick your nose into other people's business.

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?  

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Or you could just let people be silly at let the marketplace decide.

You never cease to amaze me on how much you like to stick your nose into other people's business.

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?  

Yeah cause letting the market decide worked so well in the past



I don't see why your so adamant in denying Actual people their rights. Again a Business is NOT a person.

Lets be real the baker is Not just being silly they are discriminating for no good reason, so it is straight up a REAL person acting as a Private citizen who's Rights are being denied by a Business.

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Yeah cause letting the market decide worked so well in the past



I don't see why your so adamant in denying Actual people their rights. Again a Business is NOT a person.

Lets be real the baker is Not just being silly they are discriminating for no good reason, so it is straight up a REAL person acting as a Private citizen who's Rights are being denied by a Business.

It worked. There were businesses that catered to minorities, that actually did very well. The market rewarded those smart enough to expand their customer base. That's why so many black owned businesses went bankrupt once the civil rights bills passed. In one of the greatest ironies in our country, the Civil Rights bills created black slums where thriving black businesses once thrived.

Anyway, you never answered my question.

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It worked. There were businesses that catered to minorities, that actually did very well. The market rewarded those smart enough to expand their customer base. That's why so many black owned businesses went bankrupt once the civil rights bills passed. In one of the greatest ironies in our country, the Civil Rights bills created black slums where thriving black businesses once thrived.

Anyway, you never answered my question.

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?

Ridiculous argument
Dont you think if there had been no segregation in the first place, those business would have opened up in all over society, like other buisness and never would have shut down.
When blacks got rights, they rightly moved to better areas, they were onced denied.
Sorry, but that is a really dumb argument
Segregation is wrong

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It worked. There were businesses that catered to minorities, that actually did very well. The market rewarded those smart enough to expand their customer base. That's why so many black owned businesses went bankrupt once the civil rights bills passed. In one of the greatest ironies in our country, the Civil Rights bills created black slums where thriving black businesses once thrived.

Anyway, you never answered my question.

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?

Ridiculous argument
Dont you think if there had been no segregation in the first place, those business would have opened up in all over society, like other buisness and never would have shut down.
When blacks got rights, they rightly moved to better areas and houses, they were onced denied.
Sorry, but that is a really dumb argument
Segregation is wrong

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:


Ridiculous argument
Dont you think if there had been no segregation in the first place, those business would have opened up in all over society, like other buisness and never would have shut down.
When blacks got rights, they rightly moved to better areas, they were onced denied.
Sorry, but that is a really dumb argument
Segregation is wrong

I think segregation is dumb. Anyone that does it is a fool.

However,  

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?

veya_victaous wrote:it did that in the USA but not everywhere. which does also lean to the still existing institutional racism and discrimination in the USA. case in point this judgement

and Yes a Bakery that makes political party cakes should make a Nazi cake. The point You seems to keep missing is the Bakery is Business, it does not have a Religion.

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I think segregation is dumb. Anyone that does it is a fool.

However,  

Do you think Jews should have to bake Nazi cakes?

Well Nazism, is a symbol of hate and like any offensive message, you would deny service

Gay marriage is not is symbol of hate but love

How are they comparable?

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:


Well Nazism, is a symbol of hate and like any offensive message, you would deny service

Gay marriage is not is symbol of hate but love

How are they comparable?

They are both legal positions in this country. Same as being a Klan member. Same as being a member of the Westboro Baptists idiots.

I'm guessing you would force a printer to print up their fliers too?  

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

They are both legal positions in this country. Same as being a Klan member. Same as being a member of the Westboro Baptists idiots.

I'm guessing you would force a printer to print up their fliers too?  

You are not understanding the point.

The Klan and Westboro are both extreme groups of hate

Gay marriage is a symbol of love

The ridiculous point here, is this is blatant gay hatred.

As if based on sins, for Christians, why only gays denied?

Why not countless other people based on sins?

Where even worse, in Christianity, nobody is without sin.

Jesus is meant to be the judge, not humans and taught to love, not hate.

Syl wrote:I dont think anyone should be forced to bake a cake if they dont want to.

Also...why would anyone want to give business to a company who dont welcome it....I wouldnt.

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:


You are not understanding the point.

The Klan and Westboro are both extreme groups of hate

Gay marriage is a symbol of love

The ridiculous point here, is this is blatant gay hatred.

As if based on sins, for Christians, why only gays denied?

Why not countless other people based on sins?

Where even worse, in Christianity, nobody is without sin.

Jesus is meant to be the judge, not humans and taught to love, not hate.

I understand the point just fine. I'm not going to try and figure out why someone has issues with designing and making products for others. And I'm damn sure not going to support them being forced to work for another man, for whatever reason. I will always support a persons right to opt out.

Just like I would support a printer's right to opt out of making these shirts.
 

Syl wrote:I was going to add, but its been mentioned, should a black baker be forced to bake a cake with little white pointy hatted figures on the top?

Didge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I understand the point just fine. I'm not going to try and figure out why someone has issues with designing and making products for others. And I'm damn sure not going to support them being forced to work for another man, for whatever reason. I will always support a persons right to opt out.

Just like I would support a printer's right to opt out of making these shirts.
 

But they would have a right to opt out as its hate speech, which would apply to any hate speech

Its universal and would apply to any customer.

That means its not discriminating against any group

So you are not understanding this here

Singling out gays, based on a view, they think its a sin, is not universal to all customers and all sinners, is it?

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:I was going to add, but its been mentioned, should a black baker be forced to bake a cake with little white pointy hatted figures on the top?

The world needs less force.

Maddog wrote:

Didge wrote:


But they would have a right to opt out as its hate speech, which would apply to any hate speech

Its universal and would apply to any customer.

That means its not discriminating against any group

So you are not understanding this here

Singling out gays, based on a view, they think its a sin, is not universal to all customers and all sinners, is it?

I understand just fine. You don't understand me, and that's OK.  

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:it did that in the USA but not everywhere. which does also lean to the still existing institutional racism and discrimination in the USA. case in point this judgement

and Yes a Bakery that makes political party cakes should make a Nazi cake. The point You seems to keep missing is the Bakery is Business, it does not have a Religion.

OK, As long as you believe that forcing Jews to bake cakes for Nazis, is somehow improving society, I can't argue with that. I can disagree with it, as I think it's a form of slavery and I abhor slavery, but that's just me.    

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

OK, As long as you believe that forcing Jews to bake cakes for Nazis, is somehow improving society, I can't argue with that. I can disagree with it, as I think it's a form of slavery and I abhor slavery, but that's just me.    

a Business can't be a slave

and they are not forced to,
they do not need to work for that business

IT's a real simple Principal..
Businesses are NOT people.

veya_victaous wrote:Yes, Again Business Do not have the right to opinions on peoples race or sexual preference. If some one is not suitable to operate a business than they should not operate a business, just like if you can't preform surgery you shouldn't be a surgeon.

the individual that works for or owns the business has the same rights and options as the MacDonald's employee that doesn't want to serve Texans.

Raggamuffin wrote:They're not refusing the serve the customer because they're gay though, they just don't want to make a cake for a gay wedding. If it was a birthday cake, they would serve them.

Cass wrote:If people don’t want to serve certain types of other people then fine. You can therefore no longer claim tax breaks or business write offs.

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:Yes, Again Business Do not have the right to opinions on peoples race or sexual preference. If some one is not suitable to operate a business than they should not operate a business, just like if you can't preform surgery you shouldn't be a surgeon.

the individual that works for or owns the business has the same rights and options as the MacDonald's employee that doesn't want to serve Texans.

Well, this judge in California disagrees with you to a degree.  

You may want to reread the OP.  

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Well, this judge in California disagrees with you to a degree.  

You may want to reread the OP.  

Yeah of course a Judge in the worlds leading Corpocracy will say Businesses have greater rights than humans

why do you think the world laughs when the USA talks about 'freedom' as if they have it?

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Well, this judge in California disagrees with you to a degree.  

You may want to reread the OP.  

Yeah of course a Judge in the worlds leading Corpocracy will say Businesses have greater rights than humans

why do you think the world laughs when the USA talks about 'freedom' as if they have it?

If someone was forced to bake a cake, how would that mean they were free though?

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Well, this judge in California disagrees with you to a degree.  

You may want to reread the OP.  

Yeah of course a Judge in the worlds leading Corpocracy will say Businesses have greater rights than humans

why do you think the world laughs when the USA talks about 'freedom' as if they have it?

Maddog wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Well, this judge in California disagrees with you to a degree.  

You may want to reread the OP.  

Yeah of course a Judge in the worlds leading Corpocracy will say Businesses have greater rights than humans

why do you think the world laughs when the USA talks about 'freedom' as if they have it?

The cake decorator is a human.

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

If someone was forced to bake a cake, how would that mean they were free though?

you mean if someone did their job, they are not forced to they can quit Just like anyone else.

Again No PERSON is forced to do anything, the BUSINESS is forced to.

Because in Civilized Democracies Freedoms and rights belong to PEOPLE not CORPORATIONS

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

The cake decorator is a human.

and that Human cake decorator is an employee of Tastries Bakery
which is a business and is the Entity Selling Cakes
the transaction is between Tastries Bakery and the Customer

SO in the name of freedom and equality the Cake decorator has the EXACT same rights as the MacDonald's employee to interfere with a legal sale of advertised goods and services. which is none.

You see it is Simply you confusing what is happening

Maddog wrote:

Cass wrote:If people don’t want to serve certain types of other people then fine. You can therefore no longer claim tax breaks or business write offs.

How about they just don't pay taxes at all?  

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

The cake decorator is a human.

and that Human cake decorator is an employee of Tastries Bakery
which is a business and is the Entity Selling Cakes
the transaction is between Tastries Bakery and the Customer

SO in the name of freedom and equality the Cake decorator has the EXACT same rights as the MacDonald's employee to interfere with a legal sale of advertised goods and services. which is none.

You see it is Simply you confusing what is happening

She's the owner actually. I think the issue here is that the cake does not yet exist. If she refused to sell one off the shelf, that would be different. She's not actually refusing to serve the gay couple, she just doesn't want to make a wedding cake.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She's the owner actually. I think the issue here is that the cake does not yet exist. If she refused to sell one off the shelf, that would be different. She's not actually refusing to serve the gay couple, she just doesn't want to make a wedding cake.

The issue is actually whether she is falsely advertising her business. If you offer wedding cakes and you are open to the public, you have to make wedding cakes for anyone who asks, or you're engaged in false advertising.

HoratioTarr wrote:Is the baker refusing the make the cake because the couple are gay or refusing to make a gay themed cake?