Should bakers be forced to make gender transition celebration cakes?

[Jarhyn]

<comparatively unimportant stuff snipped> I made a mistake in trusting you to argue in good faith. <comparatively unimportant stuff snipped>

You should be ashamed of yourself. You owe me an apology. Since it will no doubt be a cold day in hell before you deliver, we're done here.

How about this: I feel exactly as much shame as you feel in posting an example crafted specifically to not talk to the argument but designed to look as though it might. You let me know, and I'll work on it.

 

[Bomb#20]

Seriously?
You're unaware of the recent history?
Tom

Please elaborate on your conspiracy theory. How would the customer know ahead of time that baker was sufficiently anti-trans to not want to make a cake?

Isn't Phillips the owner of a bakery that was already taken all the way to SCOTUS?

Sorry if I'm mistaken.

You are not mistaken.

I don't pay much attention to this sort of pettiness. Maybe Scardina didn't know that making this about her frivolous lawsuit would result in having to get a pink and blue cake from any of the other many bakeries that would happily make a few bucks from the order. I didn't get that impression from the first few posts. I thought she'd deliberately made this about her issues.

Sorry if I'm mistaken.

You are not mistaken. She demanded the cake from Phillips the same day the Supreme Court agreed to hear his appeal of the lower court ruling against him. Perhaps she expected him to win.

 

[Metaphor]

Just as a business can not deny service to the public on a whim.

Phillips did not deny service to the public, and a private business providing custom goods is nothing like an officer of the State providing for general protection/public defence.

State law may well entitle the customer to the baker's labor if the baker's denial to provide services falls within the anti-discrimination laws. I admit I'm not sure if the state in which this Baker does business has laws protecting same-sex couples and transgenders from discrimination.

Phillips did not refuse to serve somebody because they were trans. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

I'm not really interested but I'll insert [how so?] here since you made a statement without explanation.

The argument simply makes no sense. Why does "I'm going to start a business making custom cakes" mean "I am morally obliged to provide every single person who enquires with the cake of their choice"?

It simply does not follow.

Do you think Phillips should be obliged to make a cake with the writing "Niggers suck cocks in Hell"?

 

[Bomb#20]

<comparatively unimportant stuff snipped> I made a mistake in trusting you to argue in good faith. <comparatively unimportant stuff snipped>

You should be ashamed of yourself. You owe me an apology. Since it will no doubt be a cold day in hell before you deliver, we're done here.

How about this: I feel exactly as much shame as you feel in posting an example crafted specifically to not talk to the argument but designed to look as though it might. You let me know, and I'll work on it.

Apparently we're not done. Your above accusation is false, damaging, and made with malice and reckless disregard for the truth. You should be ashamed of yourself. You owe me two apologies.

 

[Metaphor]

The baker can refuse to make cakes celebrating anything or refuse to put messages on any cake.

But not just for people undergoing a gender transformation.

Yes, I know you want the State to force people to express things they don't believe. You've established that.

Why do you keep bringing up this strawman? "The State" is your bogeyman that uses force and we should all be afraid. You need to drop that baloney. Simply stated "the State" cannot "force" you to bake or not bake a cake.

How is "the State" a strawman? The State uses force to get you to comply with laws.

If it were not for the force of the State, Scardina would have put in a cake order, Phillips would have said 'no', and that would have been the end of it. But that wasn't the end of it.

If what you mean is "the State can't force Phillips to bake the cake, it can only fine him if he doesn't, close down his business if he doesn't, put him in jail if he doesn't"....that's what I mean by force. His actions are forced in the same way that handing over your wallet to somebody who has a gun to your head and demands it is forced.

 

[Metaphor]

Hello, captain obvious. You are correct, but how exactly does stating this fact answer the question of how these facts are applied to the issue presented in the OP article/case?

The question of whether Phillips is legally required to provide Scardina's cake has not been settled. Nobody has really offered their opinion on that. I'm interested in that, but I'm also interested in what people think should be the case.

Big difference yet I was capable of providing service regardless of what bullshit the end-user was into. I did not cease to exist, my dislike for the confederacy hasn't ceased to exist, my equipment and ability to help another group of people party did not cease to exist, my rights didn't cease to exist & my hand accepting the cash did not cease to exist.

I have no idea what you think your example is showing. You were not legally obligated to do this party, but you didn't object that hard so you did it anyway? So what? Are you suggesting you were morally obligated to do the party?

 

[Metaphor]

If the cake was for a neo-nazi rally after-party but did not have a swastika, but only red, white and black colors, should he be forced to make the cake for that customer?

Sure. If he is offering custom cakes, made to order, it is a promise to follow orders - unless, of course, the order is to commit or aid and abet a crime.
Crimes against the baker's personal politics, religion or sexual proclivities aren't crimes.

And what if instead his bakery offer is "the bakery reserves the right to refuse any commission"?

I suspect you don't want to give Phillips that right of refusal, even if that's how he advertised his business.

 

[Metaphor]

No. Because thieves and johns actually do something.

Like the lawyer actually did something. And it wasn't order a cake. She ordered up a lawsuit she was confident of winning in the court of Facebook, maybe in legal court as well.
Doesn't matter if she wins in legal court, winning in social media will more than compensate for her legal expenses.

I dislike Phillips for his fake Christian agenda. I dislike Scardina even more for her fake queer agenda.

Tom

Ah, but the baker did do something. He stated his refusal and in doing so discriminated against a person due to their sexual nature.

No, he didn't. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

 

[Jarhyn]

How about this: I feel exactly as much shame as you feel in posting an example crafted specifically to not talk to the argument but designed to look as though it might. You let me know, and I'll work on it.

Apparently we're not done. Your above accusation is false, damaging, and made with malice and reckless disregard for the truth. You should be ashamed of yourself. You owe me two apologies.

All I see is the argument you made, and I fully admit to reading it hastily the first time around, mostly because, as I stated, I expected it to actually talk to what I had written about. Apologise to yourself.

 

[ZiprHead]

No. Because thieves and johns actually do something.

Like the lawyer actually did something. And it wasn't order a cake. She ordered up a lawsuit she was confident of winning in the court of Facebook, maybe in legal court as well.
Doesn't matter if she wins in legal court, winning in social media will more than compensate for her legal expenses.

I dislike Phillips for his fake Christian agenda. I dislike Scardina even more for her fake queer agenda.

Tom

Ah, but the baker did do something. He stated his refusal and in doing so discriminated against a person due to their sexual nature.

No, he didn't. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

And he stated why.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

If what you mean is "the State can't force Phillips to bake the cake, it can only fine him if he doesn't, close down his business if he doesn't, put him in jail if he doesn't"....that's what I mean by force. His actions are forced in the same way that handing over your wallet to somebody who has a gun to your head and demands it is forced.

There you go again with another inane analogy, like your equating someone baking a pink/blue cake with someone baking a cake that says "Niggers suck cocks in Hell." You didn't by some chance do some lawyering for Trump and election fraud claims?

 

[Metaphor]

No, he didn't. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

And he stated why.

Yes: because he thinks God made people male and female and gender transition is nothing to celebrate.

 

[ZiprHead]

No, he didn't. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

And he stated why.

Yes: because he thinks God made people male and female and gender transition is nothing to celebrate.

What did Jesus say about trans people?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Should the signwriter be able to refuse to write 'Black people are going to Hell"?

Well, technically the sign is almost certainly correct.

Or do you think no black person ever goes here?

 

[Metaphor]

If what you mean is "the State can't force Phillips to bake the cake, it can only fine him if he doesn't, close down his business if he doesn't, put him in jail if he doesn't"....that's what I mean by force. His actions are forced in the same way that handing over your wallet to somebody who has a gun to your head and demands it is forced.

There you go again with another inane analogy, like your equating someone baking a pink/blue cake with someone baking a cake that says "Niggers suck cocks in Hell." You didn't by some chance do some lawyering for Trump and election fraud claims?

I did not equate them.

I provided what I consider to be an extreme example to test various posters on their "just do it and shut up" attitude.

Most posters on this thread appear to take the position that forcing the baker to write the words "Happy gender transition celebration" on the cake is a step too far, or at least, they don't think the State should compel the baker to do it if he doesn't want to. They recognise it is forcing the baker to express a message he does not agree with.

My challenge was specifically to untermensche, who appears to believe the State should compel signwriters (and bakers, and anyone else in a business) to write anything a client wants. I gave him an extreme example, and obviously he did not agree that a signwriter should be forced to write it, so he said "obviously, they can agree not to write violent messages". So I wrote another example that isn't violent - the one you've quoted - and he is yet to tell me if he thinks a signwriter should be forced to write it.

 

[Metaphor]

Yes: because he thinks God made people male and female and gender transition is nothing to celebrate.

What did Jesus say about trans people?

Nothing, because Jesus didn't exist.

 

[Metaphor]

Yes, businesses are legally "forced" to provide their services to people, whether or not the proprietors approve of those people's lifestyles (except in some cases where the proprietors are right wing religious extremists). But even Chick-fil-A isn't allowed to refuse service to a person for ordering while black or while gay.
That's not the same thing as forcing people to "express" things they don't believe.

Phillips did not refuse to serve Scardina because she is trans. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

DON'T OFFER "CUSTOM CAKES" TO THE PUBLIC IF YOU ARE ONLY WILLING TO MAKE WHAT YOU LIKE!
It would be easy enough to simply offer "CAKES".

"Problem" solved.

So, that's the source of your moral outrage? That Phillips deceived Scardina by offering a custom cake making service and then not following up?

If Phillips had "management reserves the right to refuse any commission" would that solve the problem? If not, why not?

 

[Gospel]

Yes, businesses are legally "forced" to provide their services to people, whether or not the proprietors approve of those people's lifestyles (except in some cases where the proprietors are right wing religious extremists). But even Chick-fil-A isn't allowed to refuse service to a person for ordering while black or while gay.
That's not the same thing as forcing people to "express" things they don't believe.

Phillips did not refuse to serve Scardina because she is trans. He refused to bake a gender transition celebration cake.

DON'T OFFER "CUSTOM CAKES" TO THE PUBLIC IF YOU ARE ONLY WILLING TO MAKE WHAT YOU LIKE!
It would be easy enough to simply offer "CAKES".

"Problem" solved.

So, that's the source of your moral outrage? That Phillips deceived Scardina by offering a custom cake making service and then not following up?

If Phillips had "management reserves the right to refuse any commission" would that solve the problem? If not, why not?

It would solve the problem as long as the commission refused is not for a reason protected by anti-discrimination laws.

 

[Gospel]

Here Metaphor I'll help you out since you don't seem to be taking my hints.

https://ccrd.colorado.gov/discrimination

Snip: It would be a discriminatory action for a place of public accommodation, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, of the public accommodation based on that person or groups' protected class.

Do I actually need to grab the statute for you?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Here Metaphor I'll help you out since you don't seem to be taking my hints.

https://ccrd.colorado.gov/discrimination

Snip: It would be a discriminatory action for a place of public accommodation, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, of the public accommodation based on that person or groups' protected class.

Do I actually need to grab the statute for you?

The refusal was not on account of Scardina's being trans, but rather, on account of the cake being for celebrating a transition.