Should bakers be forced to make gender transition celebration cakes?

[untermensche]

Heartbreak and humiliation?

Why not? I guess it should all be puppy dogs and roses when someone discriminates against you.

Why not? If a single baker refusing to make your gender transition celebration cake and this breaks your heart and humiliates you, you don't need a gender transition celebration cake. You need psychological counselling to understand why the opinion of one complete stranger could break your heart and humiliate you, and you need to learn techniques to build psychological resilience, because your current level of resilience is not detectable.

Why not? Because for every Colorado baker who doesn't want to take your commission for a gender transition celebration cake, there will be another who will not only take your commission, but will specialise in baking gender transition celebration cakes. They'll probably give you a discount if you convey your heartbreak and humiliation suffered at the hands of a complete stranger who refused your commission.

Why not? Because if I went to a bakery that didn't want to bake a cake for my same-sex wedding, I would say 'oh, that's sad, I'll take my money elsewhere', and then I'd leave the shop and never shop with or think about the baker again.

This is about what people in business should be required to do.

If they serve the general public then they must not discriminate illegally.

We clearly understand that in the case of the lunch counter that to not serve black customers is illegal discrimination.

Refusing to serve the reasonable requests of people undergoing a gender transition process is also illegal discrimination.

Even if some Supreme Court dinosaurs get it wrong.

No line from scripture can be produced that says it is sinful to bake cakes for people undergoing gender transition.

To claim it is a religious stance is absurd nonsense.

 

[Emily Lake]

It does not matter why she did it, but I will note you are being very uncharitable in assigning her motivation, though I suppose you could be right.

I don't think it counts as uncharitable when that is what the lawyer themself said they were doing.

Scardina made a point of telling Phillips what the symbolism of the cake was. And it was clear that it was intended as a trap.

If Phillips agrees to make the cake, then there is a precedent for Phillips being willing to make cakes that express a message in violation of his conscience... which gives Scardina ammunition for the appeal against the ruling in Phillips' favor with respect to the same-sex wedding cake.

If Phillips refuses to make the cake, then Phillips is discriminating against Scardina on the basis of their status as trans, because there was no actual words on the cake, just colors.

That's not speculation - that's what Scardina said their intention was.

 

[Metaphor]

No line from scripture can be produced that says it is sinful to bake cakes for people undergoing gender transition.

To claim it is a religious stance is absurd nonsense.

I don't care about Phillips's religious beliefs and neither do you. If the Bible said very clearly that gender transition was wrong and doing commerce with somebody who had undergone it was forbidden, you'd say it doesn't matter. Phillips should be forced to make the cake or get out of commerce all together.

That Phillips does not want to bake a gender transition celebration cake is sufficient for him not to bake it.

People like you, who want to use the force of the State to force people to express messages they do not want to express, do not value freedom or humanity. But I've never spoken to a communist who does.

 

[untermensche]

The baker is not expressing a message. He is fulfilling an order.

The message expressed is expressed by the buyer.

And I do care about legitimate religious practice. Like allowing people to own their religious books and statues. Allowing them to freely meet and worship.

Giving people off of work for religious holidays.

But somebody in the business of baking cakes is not engaging in a religious practice.

And there is no reasonable objection to other people celebrating the reality of gender transition.

Forcing the baker to celebrate would be a problem. He just has to make a cake. The celebrating will be done by others. That is none of the baker's business.

 

[Metaphor]

The baker is not expressing a message. He is fulfilling an order.

The message expressed is expressed by the buyer.

And I do care about legitimate religious practice. Like allowing people to own their religious books and statues. Allowing them to freely meet and worship.

Giving people off of work for religious holidays.

But somebody in the business of baking cakes is not engaging in a religious practice.

And there is no reasonable objection to other people celebrating the reality of gender transition.

The baker prevented nobody from celebrating a gender transition. He didn't hold a gun to anybody's head or initiate the force of the State to stop them via legislation or via the judiciary.

I wouldn't make a cake celebrating a bris, and it is absurd for you to think I ought be forced.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not what you bill yourself as, it's what you actually do

Wrong. You think you could tell Andy Warhol what to paint? Could you force a white supremacist poet to write a poem celebrating black culture, or gay culture, or ... Oh never mind;
you'll have a hard time even finding a right wing artist of any sort. Maybe you can dig up Ted Nugent and tell him what to play.

If you have an art gallery stocked with cakes you like to make, whether or not the art is ephemeral, your art is not subject to the commands of potential customers.
Open up a cake shop offering custom cakes made to order, and you may well be subject to customers' whims. At least some of them. I guess we shall find out whether celebration of gender transition is one of those things in that location. But in any event, declaring your shop a gallery should allow you to make your own decisions about whether to bake gender transition celebration - or any other theme - cakes.

You've got it backwards. Andy Warhol is an artist--only does what he wants to do. Likewise, writing a poem is art.

Creative processes to make a one-of-a-kind object: You're an artist

That's meaningless. Slightly above the molecular level, all objects in the universe are unique.

A nitpick that isn't relevant.

 

[Jarhyn]

The baker is not expressing a message. He is fulfilling an order.

The message expressed is expressed by the buyer.

And I do care about legitimate religious practice. Like allowing people to own their religious books and statues. Allowing them to freely meet and worship.

Giving people off of work for religious holidays.

But somebody in the business of baking cakes is not engaging in a religious practice.

And there is no reasonable objection to other people celebrating the reality of gender transition.

Forcing the baker to celebrate would be a problem. He just has to make a cake. The celebrating will be done by others. That is none of the baker's business.

I really like this, except for the fact that there is still the matter of odious requests. Such as cakes celebrating Adolph''s birthday, black and white on red.

There are some things that can be reasonably declined up front, but they have to be declined on the basis of whether you would decline the specific shape of it for anyone no matter what. If you would have made it before you knew the party it was going to, you should have to make it for them for that. If it's a statement that is specific, just add it to the book for everyone, thank them for their time, and ask them to come back no sooner than in three days.

 

[KeepTalking]

Heartbreak and humiliation?

Why not? I guess it should all be puppy dogs and roses when someone discriminates against you.

Why not? If a single baker refusing to make your gender transition celebration cake and this breaks your heart and humiliates you, you don't need a gender transition celebration cake. You need psychological counselling to understand why the opinion of one complete stranger could break your heart and humiliate you, and you need to learn techniques to build psychological resilience, because your current level of resilience is not detectable.

Why not? Because for every Colorado baker who doesn't want to take your commission for a gender transition celebration cake, there will be another who will not only take your commission, but will specialise in baking gender transition celebration cakes. They'll probably give you a discount if you convey your heartbreak and humiliation suffered at the hands of a complete stranger who refused your commission.

Why not? Because if I went to a bakery that didn't want to bake a cake for my same-sex wedding, I would say 'oh, that's sad, I'll take my money elsewhere', and then I'd leave the shop and never shop with or think about the baker again.

So, I will mark you down for no one should get emotional when others discriminate against them based on their gender identity.

 

[KeepTalking]

It does not matter why she did it, but I will note you are being very uncharitable in assigning her motivation, though I suppose you could be right.

I don't think it counts as uncharitable when that is what the lawyer themself said they were doing.

Scardina made a point of telling Phillips what the symbolism of the cake was. And it was clear that it was intended as a trap.

If Phillips agrees to make the cake, then there is a precedent for Phillips being willing to make cakes that express a message in violation of his conscience... which gives Scardina ammunition for the appeal against the ruling in Phillips' favor with respect to the same-sex wedding cake.

If Phillips refuses to make the cake, then Phillips is discriminating against Scardina on the basis of their status as trans, because there was no actual words on the cake, just colors.

That's not speculation - that's what Scardina said their intention was.

I think you need to go back and read the post TomC made to which I was replying. The motivation he ascribed to her went far beyond what she said she was doing.

 

[Metaphor]

Why not? If a single baker refusing to make your gender transition celebration cake and this breaks your heart and humiliates you, you don't need a gender transition celebration cake. You need psychological counselling to understand why the opinion of one complete stranger could break your heart and humiliate you, and you need to learn techniques to build psychological resilience, because your current level of resilience is not detectable.

Why not? Because for every Colorado baker who doesn't want to take your commission for a gender transition celebration cake, there will be another who will not only take your commission, but will specialise in baking gender transition celebration cakes. They'll probably give you a discount if you convey your heartbreak and humiliation suffered at the hands of a complete stranger who refused your commission.

Why not? Because if I went to a bakery that didn't want to bake a cake for my same-sex wedding, I would say 'oh, that's sad, I'll take my money elsewhere', and then I'd leave the shop and never shop with or think about the baker again.

So, I will mark you down for no one should get emotional when others discriminate against them based on their gender identity.

Why do you quote me and then twist my words? People can see you doing it.

Refusing to bake a gender transition cake is not the same thing as discriminating against somebody based on their gender identity. Phillips did not discriminate against Scardina based on her gender identity.

But also: I did not command people should not "get emotional". I said heartbreak and humiliation are grossly disproportionate and dysfunctional responses to a complete stranger refusing your commission.

 

[repoman]

Why not? If a single baker refusing to make your gender transition celebration cake and this breaks your heart and humiliates you, you don't need a gender transition celebration cake. You need psychological counselling to understand why the opinion of one complete stranger could break your heart and humiliate you, and you need to learn techniques to build psychological resilience, because your current level of resilience is not detectable.

Why not? Because for every Colorado baker who doesn't want to take your commission for a gender transition celebration cake, there will be another who will not only take your commission, but will specialise in baking gender transition celebration cakes. They'll probably give you a discount if you convey your heartbreak and humiliation suffered at the hands of a complete stranger who refused your commission.

Why not? Because if I went to a bakery that didn't want to bake a cake for my same-sex wedding, I would say 'oh, that's sad, I'll take my money elsewhere', and then I'd leave the shop and never shop with or think about the baker again.

So, I will mark you down for no one should get emotional when others discriminate against them based on their gender identity.

Why do you quote me and then twist my words? People can see you doing it.

Refusing to bake a gender transition cake is not the same thing as discriminating against somebody based on their gender identity. Phillips did not discriminate against Scardina based on her gender identity.

But also: I did not command people should not "get emotional". I said heartbreak and humiliation are grossly disproportionate and dysfunctional responses to a complete stranger refusing your commission.

This lawsuit is a brutal and controversial thing to do now, but in 10-20 years as the cultural zeitgeist moves forward - aided by these types of lawsuits - it will not be.

This lawsuit and the rulings sought from it are for reshaping the consensus.

Are you going to play to win, Metaphor? What new strategy should you employ?

 

[Metaphor]

Why do you quote me and then twist my words? People can see you doing it.

Refusing to bake a gender transition cake is not the same thing as discriminating against somebody based on their gender identity. Phillips did not discriminate against Scardina based on her gender identity.

But also: I did not command people should not "get emotional". I said heartbreak and humiliation are grossly disproportionate and dysfunctional responses to a complete stranger refusing your commission.

This lawsuit is a brutal and controversial thing to do now, but in 10-20 years as the cultural zeitgeist moves forward - aided by these types of lawsuits - it will not be.

This lawsuit and the rulings sought from it are for reshaping the consensus.

Are you going to play to win, Metaphor? What new strategy should you employ?

I'm not quite sure what you are asking me.

 

[laughing dog]

People like you, who want to use the force of the State to force people to express messages they do not want to express, do not value freedom or humanity.

In the US, the state forces racists to serve black people which is a message that black people deserve service - a message racists do not wish to express. So, please forgive any reader who thinks your position is indecent or inhumane.

 

[Metaphor]

People like you, who want to use the force of the State to force people to express messages they do not want to express, do not value freedom or humanity.

In the US, the state forces racists to serve black people which is a message that black people deserve service - a message racists do not wish to express. So, please forgive any reader who thinks your position is indecent or inhumane.

I don't know that I owe forgiveness to people who are sympathetic to your sophistry.

 

[Ahab]

So the trans person is celebrating the transition but the baker is not discriminating against that person for doing the transition celebration.

I wonder if the baker was told to say he's just objecting to the cake by his lawyer.

No, he is not discriminating against the trans person on account of the their being a trans person. Rather, he is refusing to make a gender transition cake. If the gender transition cake had not been ordered by Scardina but by one of Scardina's friends, the baker would have refused just as much. And if a Woke non-trans person had requested a 'trans celebration cake' to use, say, in a demonstration in support of trans claims, the baker would have refused as well.

This was the most sensible take on the issue.

 

[Jarhyn]

So the trans person is celebrating the transition but the baker is not discriminating against that person for doing the transition celebration.

I wonder if the baker was told to say he's just objecting to the cake by his lawyer.

No, he is not discriminating against the trans person on account of the their being a trans person. Rather, he is refusing to make a gender transition cake. If the gender transition cake had not been ordered by Scardina but by one of Scardina's friends, the baker would have refused just as much. And if a Woke non-trans person had requested a 'trans celebration cake' to use, say, in a demonstration in support of trans claims, the baker would have refused as well.

This was the most sensible take on the issue.

No, he is not discriminating against a black person on account of their being a black person. Rather, he is refusing to make an Interracial wedding cake. If the Interracial wedding cake had not been ordered by Black Person but rather by one of Black Person's friends, the baker would have refused just as much. If a woke non-black person had requested an 'interracial relationship celebration cake', to use, say, in demonstration of support of interracial love, the baker would have refused as well.

Sure... That's sensible... /S

 

[laughing dog]

People like you, who want to use the force of the State to force people to express messages they do not want to express, do not value freedom or humanity.

In the US, the state forces racists to serve black people which is a message that black people deserve service - a message racists do not wish to express. So, please forgive any reader who thinks your position is indecent or inhumane.

I don't know that I owe forgiveness to people who are sympathetic to your sophistry.

The State does force people to express messages they do not want to express. The question is what is the appropriate limit of that power. Really, this is not sophistry, but fairly uncomplicated to grasp.

No one said you owed anything to anyone. In fact, no one said you had to even bother to try to understand anything.

But I certainly forgive your apparent tacit or implicit support of racism with your principle of the State not forcing people to express messages they do no want to express.

 

[Elixir]

You've got it backwards. Andy Warhol is an artist--only does what he wants to do. Likewise, writing a poem is art.

That's exactly what I said. Read for comprehension.
Baker X could be an artist too. But if he offers custom "art" made to order, he's not an artist he's a contractor, and not allowed to discriminate.

 

[Jarhyn]

You've got it backwards. Andy Warhol is an artist--only does what he wants to do. Likewise, writing a poem is art.

That's exactly what I said. Read for comprehension.
Baker X could be an artist too. But if he offers custom "art" made to order, he's not an artist he's a contractor, and not allowed to discriminate.

Interestingly enough, there are hybrid models too: my own husband is an art contractor, and a popular piece format for commission work is the "YCH":

The artist draws a scene in sketch, but with the subject character not actually finished, or as a placeholder.

I don't know how well that would translate to cakes, but it would allow a lot more leeway in constraining the product.

 

[Trausti]

You've got it backwards. Andy Warhol is an artist--only does what he wants to do. Likewise, writing a poem is art.

That's exactly what I said. Read for comprehension.
Baker X could be an artist too. But if he offers custom "art" made to order, he's not an artist he's a contractor, and not allowed to discriminate.

So if the Westboro Baptist Church wanted a "God Hates Fags" cake, the contractor couldn't say no?