homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Special interest discussion   » Dead Horses   » And there's another gay bakery case (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  ...  29  30  31 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: And there's another gay bakery case
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
...and this one goes the other way.

This one is an obvious setup. Customer asks for cake bearing anti-gay message. Baker claims the right not to add a "hateful message crafted by her own hands."

It's obvious that this isn't a guy who just genuinely wants to hold a "we hate the gays" party. It does appear to be an entirely legal message in the state of Colorado, though. The closest parallel to this in the ensemble of bakery lawsuits is the case from Northern Ireland involving the gay rights cake - that's a much closer match than any of the gay couples who just wanted a wedding cake.

As such, this case contains more "speech" by the maker than the ordinary wedding cake cases. The baker herself says
quote:
“I’m not sure if I made the right decision [legally],” Marjorie says. “But it felt right to me as a person.”
I agree with her. I think she has as much legal right to refuse to ice the message on this cake as the NI cake shop had to refuse to ice gay rights slogans on a cake for a gay rights organization, and were I her, I'd like to refuse to ice the message this customer wanted, too.

What say you all?

Posts: 4744 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
I agree with her. I think she has as much legal right to refuse to ice the message on this cake as the NI cake shop had to refuse to ice gay rights slogans on a cake for a gay rights organization, and were I her, I'd like to refuse to ice the message this customer wanted, too.

What say you all?

I think she had far more right than the NI cake shop - bigotry is not a protected category under any law that I'm aware of in the US or the UK. Sexuality, on the other hand, is protected under the Equality Act Regulations 2006 which apply in Northern Ireland.
Posts: 2786 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Siegfried
Ship's ferret
# 29

 - Posted      Profile for Siegfried   Author's homepage   Email Siegfried   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Baking and providing a cake and being asked to put a message on it are different things entirely. And very clearly a trolling attempt by the orderer.

--------------------
Siegfried
Life is just a bowl of cherries!

Posts: 5591 | From: Tallahassee, FL USA | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It probably is trolling, but it might be "sincere" Christians. Colorado has bunches of them.
I'm not sure if her refusal is legal or not. If she gets sued, it does count as civil disobedience and I'm sure she'll be supported by the community. Amusingly, if she does get sued, the ACLU will probably support the plaintiffs on constitutional rights, the same way they've supported the freedom of speech rights of Neo-Nazis and Klan members.

Posts: 2974 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
What is it with homophobes and cake? I just don't see the connection.

In the meantime, don't you think people who can't face the thought of LGBT people should start learning how to bake and do icing?

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4603 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Everyone likes cake. Except a few weird people (such as my daughter, who prefers fruit. Unnatural child).

Sounds like trolling to me, too. An attempt to establish a legal precedent for all the anti-gay bakers out there who don't want to do wedding cakes for same-sex couples? But as Palimpsest says, if the ACLU support the plaintiff (as, logically, they should) it won't work.

Posts: 3866 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
What is it with homophobes and cake? I just don't see the connection.

Most people like cake, it has to be made "just in time" so it won't go stale, they are customized for the purchaser, and as evidenced by the "cake wrecks" website, most people are very bad at making them.

If we had a cultural tradition of char-grilling congratulatory messages into a steak at the wedding breakfast, we'd be having a discussion about branding our meat.

Posts: 4744 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
You can buy toasters that burn pictures of Mickey Mouse or Hello Kitty on the toast. T hat could be the next court case.

As for the plaintiffs, they do seem to want to make their religion a blight on the landscape.

Posts: 2974 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Pigwidgeon

Ship's Owl
# 10192

 - Posted      Profile for Pigwidgeon   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
You can buy toasters that burn pictures of Mickey Mouse or Hello Kitty on the toast. That could be the next court case.

Not just Mickey Mouse or Hello Kitty...

--------------------
Don't keep calm. Go change the world.

Posts: 9297 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Doesn't matter if it's a set-up. If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.

Or we could all just prove we're a bunch of hypocrites.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18031 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Yup it's the law. So you can obey it or suffer the consequences of civil disobedience.
From a practical point of view, a baker could avoid this problem by offering to only provide one of a set of stock messages or no messages to all customers.

Posts: 2974 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Surely you have the right to refuse custom for any reason so long as it doesn't involve discrimination on the grounds of a protected characteristic? The protected characteristic under Colorado law is "creed". Bigotry is not a creed.
Posts: 2786 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
orfeo:
quote:
Doesn't matter if it's a set-up. If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.
That's freedom for you... complete with the freedom to take the consequences.
Posts: 3866 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
But as Palimpsest says, if the ACLU support the plaintiff (as, logically, they should) it won't work.

There have been two different points of view expressed in opposition to the ensemble of bigoted bakers in these pages.

One position casts the baker as some sort of common carrier, and expects him to print any message on his cakes, and talks a lot about how nobody expects the baker to believe or support the message on the cake - that the baker is not personally asserting that John Doe is actually the world's best Dad. This position would tend to support the trolling homophobe in this case.

The second position rests on those of minority sexuality being a protected class, and argues that bakers are free to refuse to make cakes for lawyers, if they have a particular dislike of the legal profession, but may not refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple who are marrying.

The cake in this case contains explicit speech about homosexuality, which makes it much more like the Irish cake (containing pro-gay marriage slogans) than about a simple wedding cake that might be made for any customer of any sexuality.

The second position is, I rather think, closer to the actual law.

Posts: 4744 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It's very simple. The baker makes the cake. The baker photographs the cake. Then the baker puts in their shop window an exquisitely-iced panel saying
quote:
I was asked by one of our local homophobes to make this cake. I made it because I believe that free speech should be exactly what it says. I hated every minute of making it because I'm opposed to what was asked to write.

The person who ordered the cake was very specific about the words. Fortunately for my sense of justice, they weren't so specific about the ingredients....



[ 20. January 2015, 11:49: Message edited by: Adeodatus ]

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9754 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.

I don't think you have the right to do either. If I say I want you to write "Gay people are fantastic" or "Gay people should be burned" on a cake I think you have the right to say you don't want to write that precise message in either case. (Arguably in the latter case you may be in for hate speech in some countries).

On the other hand if someone is having a wedding and asks for a cake in a bakery open to the public then it is discriminatory if a baker is happy to do "Anne and Jim many happy returns" but not "Dave and Jim many happy returns".

[ 24. January 2015, 07:13: Message edited by: mdijon ]

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
crunt
Shipmate
# 1321

 - Posted      Profile for crunt   Author's homepage   Email crunt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:

On the other hand if someone is having a wedding and asks for a cake in a bakery open to the public then it is discriminatory if a baker is happy to do "Anne and Jim many happy returns" but not "Dave and Jim many happy returns".

Hahaha - any baker who iced 'Many Happy Returns' on a wedding cake would probably not be very popular - no matter who was getting married.

--------------------
QUIZ: Bible
QUIZ: world religions
LTL Discussion
languagespider.com

Posts: 266 | From: Up country in the middle of Malaysia | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.

I don't think you have the right to do either. If I say I want you to write "Gay people are fantastic" or "Gay people should be burned" on a cake I think you have the right to say you don't want to write that precise message in either case. (Arguably in the latter case you may be in for hate speech in some countries).

On the other hand if someone is having a wedding and asks for a cake in a bakery open to the public then it is discriminatory if a baker is happy to do "Anne and Jim many happy returns" but not "Dave and Jim many happy returns".

Well, in the reverse case - of bakers (and photographers) that didn't want to convey gay-positive messages - I was arguing (as I think others were) that it isn't really the baker or the photographer who is engaging in 'speech', but their customers. They are hired for their technical skill, not their opinions.

Consistency demands that if I think a baker is expected to convey any lawful message requested by a customer, that's true regardless of whether I like the message.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18031 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Surely you have the right to refuse custom for any reason so long as it doesn't involve discrimination on the grounds of a protected characteristic? The protected characteristic under Colorado law is "creed". Bigotry is not a creed.

No, but "God hates gay people" could be said to be at least part of a creed. At least, if it's not, then the people who want to legally discriminate against gays because it's part of their belief system have no standing.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62941 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
For God's sake!

If you need a celebration cake you do the following:

1. Go to bakery and order a Celebration Cake with Icing - no words, no figures, just plain icing.

2. Buy online or do yourself whatever design or words you want in contrast icing and stick onto bakery cake - hint: it ain't rocket science!

3. Be happy, have a nice time, cut the cake and share with your friends.

4. If you own the bakery: bank the cheque, go home and put your feet up - again, be happy.

END. OF.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4603 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158

 - Posted      Profile for Teufelchen   Email Teufelchen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Doesn't matter if it's a set-up. If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.

'Otherwise legally acceptable' is a nice weasel phrasing to conceal the equivocation here.

Sexuality is a protected characteristic in law. Being an asshole isn't. So one message is potentially legally protected, not just acceptable, while the other is potentially legally restricted. They're just not interchangeable.

If anyone wants to declare their sexuality to be 'misanthrophic bastard', I won't stop them, but they'll have difficulty making that one stick in law.

t

--------------------
Little devil

Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Consistency demands that if I think a baker is expected to convey any lawful message requested by a customer, that's true regardless of whether I like the message.

Yes, I think that's true if one accepts the premise. I don't feel comfortable with the premise though. I'm not sure bakers are expected to convey any lawful message though, but on the other hand I don't think they can discriminate against customers.

So I don't accept that bakers have the right to turn customers away based on sexual orientation etc. - or that they can censor bland messages which are essential to the trade (e.g. congratulatory messages).

But I do think that once you get to more off-piste messages it is acceptable for bakers to feel uncomfortable with political statements about George Bush (positive or negative), to fail to get the irony behind a faux-racist message and therefore decline it or to just feel not like stretching beyond 26 characters.

That becomes problematic if there is discrimination applied in those criteria (e.g. straight weddings can have any possible message they like with hearts and names but gay weddings are limited to "Congrats" with no mentions of names).

[ 25. January 2015, 12:09: Message edited by: mdijon ]

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158

 - Posted      Profile for Teufelchen   Email Teufelchen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
So I don't accept that bakers have the right to turn customers away based on sexual orientation etc. - or that they can censor bland messages which are essential to the trade (e.g. congratulatory messages).

But I do think that once you get to more off-piste messages it is acceptable for bakers to feel uncomfortable with political statements about George Bush (positive or negative), to fail to get the irony behind a faux-racist message and therefore decline it or to just feel not like stretching beyond 26 characters.

I am no lawyer, but as I understand it, a business can refuse a customer's trade for any old reason they like, unless it's discrimination on the basis of protected characteristic. There is no general right to be allowed to do business with someone; you can't compel them to deal with you. But if it's obvious that they only refuse to deal with you because you possess some legally-protected characteristic that they object to, that's actionable.

As I mentioned above: Being a jerk is not a protected characteristic.

t

--------------------
Little devil

Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Doesn't matter if it's a set-up. If you tell a homophobic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophilic messages, then you also have to tell a homophilic baker they've got to write otherwise legally acceptable homophobic messages.

Or we could all just prove we're a bunch of hypocrites.

This is why I'd rather give non-essential service people (like bakeries) back the right to refuse service in any situation they choose. I can think of plenty much more offensive messages that some trolling asshole could legally require a baker to write. What, for instance, of religious slurs? racial slurs? references to the baker's personal life (demanded, for instance, by an ex who is a customer)?

We've got to draw a line somewhere, and we need to be consistent. Since nobody ever died because they couldn't get the inscription they wanted from one particular baker on a cake, I'd draw it in favor of the baker's right not to be harassed. The potential damage to the baker is far worse than the potential damage to the customer.

(for a far-fetched but not totally impossible case, what if the customer demands an offensive slogan or cartoon about Muhammad? And then tweets the image--along with the bakery's name? Uh huh.)

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
This is why I'd rather give non-essential service people (like bakeries) back the right to refuse service in any situation they choose. I can think of plenty much more offensive messages that some trolling asshole could legally require a baker to write.

This is why I prefer the middle ground that says a baker of delicate constitution is not actually required by law to write a lurid salacious message on a birthday cake if asked to do so, but on the other hand isn't allowed to refuse to bake for filthy faggots.

Like teufelchen says the baker can refuse to do anything they want they aren't obliged to take a job, but they can't refuse to do serve a customer on the basis of sexual orientation. Personally I don't want to live in a society where that sort of casual bigotry in public is tolerated, either in essential or non-essential services.

I don't think this is anything to do with freedom of speech either. It might be legally protected that you can publish the message in a paper and sell it on the street corner, but that doesn't mean any editor/baker is obliged to carry your message in their paper/cake (delete as applicable).

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
crunt
Shipmate
# 1321

 - Posted      Profile for crunt   Author's homepage   Email crunt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
There is a bakery chain here that will write a message on any cake you buy. I have bought a 'Happy Birthday' one, but I forgot to ask them to dedicate it to CLINT and FLICKER.

--------------------
QUIZ: Bible
QUIZ: world religions
LTL Discussion
languagespider.com

Posts: 266 | From: Up country in the middle of Malaysia | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
This is why I prefer the middle ground that says a baker of delicate constitution is not actually required by law to write a lurid salacious message on a birthday cake if asked to do so, but on the other hand isn't allowed to refuse to bake for filthy faggots.

Like teufelchen says the baker can refuse to do anything they want they aren't obliged to take a job, but they can't refuse to do serve a customer on the basis of sexual orientation. Personally I don't want to live in a society where that sort of casual bigotry in public is tolerated, either in essential or non-essential services.

I don't think this is anything to do with freedom of speech either. It might be legally protected that you can publish the message in a paper and sell it on the street corner, but that doesn't mean any editor/baker is obliged to carry your message in their paper/cake (delete as applicable).

The trouble I'm seeing with this is that you are pulling out one aspect of a baker's job and giving him/her the right to refuse it, but not other bits. And that gets dicey, because, well, what if the offensive bit isn't speech? Say, a cartoon or photo they want screened on to the cake? Okay, chop that out too. What about the person who wants an offensively shaped cake--or one with flying penises in the icing, or spraypainted, or something? Eventually the whole thing becomes ridiculous. Since baking is a nonessential service, why not allow the baker (the brewer, the candlestickmaker) to refuse to serve whomever, just as their tiny little neurons determine, and use social pressure to bring assholes into line? IMHO it'll work just as well, given the current state of public opinion (plus the availability of shaming tools like Twitter etc.). Plus, you aren't using a large blunt object (the law) to perform delicate surgery (extracting homophobic asshole bakers from all the other variety of assholes out there).

There's a problem with doing social engineering by means of law--you have to apply it as written across the board, and if somebody finds a way to exploit it (as in the OP case), you're stuck until you find a better way to rewrite the law. And there may not BE one (this is US law in this case, and as far as I know we don't have protected characteristics when it comes to sales. Heck, we don't have protected characteristics when it comes to employment unless the jerk who's firing you is fool enough to admit he's doing it because you're a woman/older person/black/what have you--and does it in writing or in the presence of witnesses. I suppose the parallel would be a baker who refuses to serve customer X and refuses to specify his reason for doing so--in which case I'm not sure the customer would have any recourse whatsoever.

This rats' nest of a situation is why I'd rather not attempt to use the law to make windows into people's consciences (motivations, social enlightenment, whatever). Use the perfectly good and much more powerful tool already to hand. Use social pressure.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Use the perfectly good and much more powerful tool already to hand. Use social pressure.

We don't use social pressure to prevent mis-selling goods and we don't refer to attempts to legislate regarding mis-selling "social engineering". That throws up complicated questions as well - at what point is the cake that was promised as part of the deal no longer up to standard, or no longer a cake.

The reason we don't leave it to peer pressure is because we consider it important people don't get ripped off. I consider it similarly important that we don't have a society in which casual bigotry is tolerated, and therefore I don't want to leave that to peer pressure either. And there are many examples of towns and places where peer pressure worked in the direction of bigotry in any case.

I think the situation I'm describing is quite close to the law in the UK. A baker wouldn't actually be forced to make a penis shaped cake as it isn't discriminatory to state that preference. It is discriminatory to state a preference not to bake cakes for gay people. Personally I don't think this is all that complicated, certainly not compared to judging a case brought against the trade descriptions act where it is claimed a cake didn't meet certain standards.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Since baking is a nonessential service, why not allow the baker (the brewer, the candlestickmaker) to refuse to serve whomever, just as their tiny little neurons determine, and use social pressure to bring assholes into line?

Jim Crow.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62941 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I AM on the sharp-and-pointy end of this policy for several reasons, you remember. I know what I'm suggesting. I think the alternative is worse.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I don't recall reading that you run a gay bakery.
Posts: 24368 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I was referring to other causes of poor treatment. Forget it.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It seems to me that to argue that the alternative to legislation is worse you need to argue either that a) the discrimination we are talking about doesn't matter all that much or b) it is legally too complex.

On a) one could argue that who really cares if you have to find another baker, but I would argue back that allowing discrimination in business is bad for society and does matter. If a baker is allowed to discriminate against customers in this way, that may well amount to constructive dismissal for any gay staff working in the bakery.

On b) it doesn't seem any more complex than trade description legislation, and introducing a new definition "non-essential service" will introduce complexity of its own.

So I don't see the argument that the alternative is worse. I accept that may be the experience of some, but I can't see that over the net.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651

 - Posted      Profile for Starlight     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Teufelchen:
I am no lawyer, but as I understand it, a business can refuse a customer's trade for any old reason they like, unless it's discrimination on the basis of protected characteristic. There is no general right to be allowed to do business with someone; you can't compel them to deal with you. But if it's obvious that they only refuse to deal with you because you possess some legally-protected characteristic that they object to, that's actionable.

That's certainly how the laws work in much of the Western world. I think it works very very well.

"I hate gay/black people and so won't sell you any cake at all" is prohibited. "That's hate speech you're asking me to write on that cake, I don't sell cakes with hate speech, but why not chose from our wide variety of cakes in our catalog?" is totally fine.

There's a short list of types of people who you're not allowed to discriminate against. But anything else is fair game according to the whims of the business owner.

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think the alternative is worse.

[Killing me]

Oh yeah, letting society do segregation and Jim Crow type stuff is soooooo much better than banning it. And we should tooootally let the bigots be as nasty as they want, because that's worked so well for societies in the past. And using the law to make people behave in a civilized way is just not at all what the law is for.
[Killing me]

Lamb Chopped, it always horrifies/amazes me in these threads how your zeal to see gay people get persecuted so far outweighs the empathy you ought to have towards a fellow minority group getting persecuted. It comes across as "well I don't like the discrimination I've experienced in my own life, but I'm fine with suffering that sort of thing if it means I get to discriminate against those filthy homosexuals, which is my number one priority as a Christian".

Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
"well I don't like the discrimination I've experienced in my own life, but I'm fine with suffering that sort of thing if it means I get to discriminate against those filthy homosexuals, which is my number one priority as a Christian".

I don't agree with Lamb Chopped at all on her stance as I've posted above but I really can't see this coming across and don't see it as being very helpful to the discussion to put it like that.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651

 - Posted      Profile for Starlight     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
mdijon, my statement was not based on this thread alone, as there have been other threads on the subject in which Lamb Chopped has made her position clear. What I hope pointing this out adds to the discussion is that you realize previous discussions made clear that her motivations for rationalizing discrimination, and trying to defend the lawfulness thereof, are that she personally wants to be able to discriminate against gay people in the course of her own business activities. I am personally very fed up with her bigotry on the subject.
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
I can think of plenty much more offensive messages that some trolling asshole could legally require a baker to write. What, for instance, of religious slurs? racial slurs? references to the baker's personal life (demanded, for instance, by an ex who is a customer)?
Lamb chopped, why do you say religious slurs or racial slurs are more offensive than anti-homosexual slurs? Seems to me they are about the same degree of nastiness, and it puzzles me that you seem to feel differently.

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11620 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
saysay

Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645

 - Posted      Profile for saysay   Email saysay   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Since baking is a nonessential service, why not allow the baker (the brewer, the candlestickmaker) to refuse to serve whomever, just as their tiny little neurons determine, and use social pressure to bring assholes into line?

Jim Crow.
And yet right now I'm fairly certain any gay couple could find a bakery perfectly willing to help them. Force all bakeries to serve them, and I'm guessing we'll wind up with a bunch of situations which are the gay bakery equivalent of sitting in a restaurant watching people who came in after you get served before you wondering if the problem is that you're in an inter-racial family. People won't be able to prove that the baker's lying and they didn't have some crisis that prevented them from baking their cake, they'll just have a lot of suspicions when it seems to happen with all gay couples who try to buy from a particular baker.

--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."

Posts: 2916 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
mdijon, my statement was not based on this thread alone, as there have been other threads on the subject in which Lamb Chopped has made her position clear. What I hope pointing this out adds to the discussion is that you realize previous discussions made clear that her motivations for rationalizing discrimination, and trying to defend the lawfulness thereof, are that she personally wants to be able to discriminate against gay people in the course of her own business activities. I am personally very fed up with her bigotry on the subject.

I have done nothing of the sort, EVER! and you owe me an apology.

Or call me to Hell and flounder as you try to prove something that has never happened. Shame on you.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
quote:
I can think of plenty much more offensive messages that some trolling asshole could legally require a baker to write. What, for instance, of religious slurs? racial slurs? references to the baker's personal life (demanded, for instance, by an ex who is a customer)?
Lamb chopped, why do you say religious slurs or racial slurs are more offensive than anti-homosexual slurs? Seems to me they are about the same degree of nastiness, and it puzzles me that you seem to feel differently.
I should have spoken more clearly. More widely offensive in terms of audienc, and more intense in terms of the probable blowback. This is in no way a value judgement on how offensive something OUGHT to be, rather an observation that you're more likely to get into the newspapers with a religious slur, and into the family courts-- or a murder trial-- with references to the baker's personal life.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19956 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
mdijon, my statement was not based on this thread alone, as there have been other threads on the subject in which Lamb Chopped has made her position clear. What I hope pointing this out adds to the discussion is that you realize previous discussions made clear that her motivations for rationalizing discrimination, and trying to defend the lawfulness thereof, are that she personally wants to be able to discriminate against gay people in the course of her own business activities. I am personally very fed up with her bigotry on the subject.

Hosting

This is a personal accusation, attacking the person as well as the issue. As such it belongs in Hell and you need to knock it off here. It's a C3 breach. Any continuation of this personal argument must go in Hell and not here.

Thanks,
Louise
Dead Horses Host

Hosting

[ 26. January 2015, 23:52: Message edited by: Louise ]

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6891 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stercus Tauri
Shipmate
# 16668

 - Posted      Profile for Stercus Tauri   Email Stercus Tauri   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Musing tangentially and possibly irrelevantly... Someone asked me recently if I had noticed how often gay people show up as exceptionally talented cooks and bakers. Looking around family and friends, I'd say the evidence is almost overwhelming. This probably has nothing to do with anything apart from the fact that homophobes are the losers by it.

--------------------
Thay haif said. Quhat say thay, Lat thame say (George Keith, 5th Earl Marischal)

Posts: 857 | From: On the traditional lands of the Six Nations. | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
And yet right now I'm fairly certain any gay couple could find a bakery perfectly willing to help them. ...

Italics mine. Because it wasn't always so. And not just for sexual minorities.

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5333 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
And yet right now I'm fairly certain any gay couple could find a bakery perfectly willing to help them. Force all bakeries to serve them, and I'm guessing we'll wind up with a bunch of situations which are the gay bakery equivalent of sitting in a restaurant watching people who came in after you get served before you wondering if the problem is that you're in an inter-racial family. People won't be able to prove that the baker's lying and they didn't have some crisis that prevented them from baking their cake, they'll just have a lot of suspicions when it seems to happen with all gay couples who try to buy from a particular baker.

Unless the baker proudly states that they don't make wedding cakes for gay couples or inter-racial couples as a policy statement. That seems to have happened in the Oregon case. If nothing else, it reduces the discrimination to a surreptitious activity.

Note that those who don't want to use bakery that discriminates and have other choices don't have to sue. So those who don't want to bother can simply go to all those other bakeries. Similarly a black person can go to a lunch counter that accepts black patronage and wait for public opinion to change in some later century.

Posts: 2974 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651

 - Posted      Profile for Starlight     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
Someone asked me recently if I had noticed how often gay people show up as exceptionally talented cooks and bakers. Looking around family and friends, I'd say the evidence is almost overwhelming.

I can't say that anecdotal evidence from my own life agrees with that.

However, if your observation is true in general, I have 2 ideas that might explain it:
1. Gay guys are less likely to be bothered by gender stereotypes and so, if they happen to be good at traditional "feminine" activities, they are more likely to pursue them to an expert level than a straight guy. (eg traditionally straight guys with an interest in fashion have been highly, highly unlikely to start a fashion label, whereas gay guys interested in that have had no qualms pursuing it as a career)

2. Same-sex attraction seems to be scientifically primarily a result of an unusual brain development process occurring in the womb. This often means their brains are unusual in other ways also. So we could expect gay people on the whole to have a wider standard deviation in their abilities than straight people. (This seems to result in both an apparent higher rate of gay geniuses and a higher rate of mental illness among gay people.) So it wouldn't be that gay people are, on average, better at baking than straight people, it would be that they are more widely distributed around the mean, and therefore that some of them are really really good at baking, and others are truly atrocious.

[ 27. January 2015, 08:42: Message edited by: Starlight ]

Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
Same-sex attraction seems to be scientifically primarily a result of an unusual brain development process occurring in the womb.

I think the evidence for this is very inconclusive. Even without biological differences in brain development it is easy to suppose that the social situation gay people find themselves in might result in different behaviour patterns.

Having said that none of my few gay friends are especially good or bad at cooking.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I guess the "equality" idea drives some people into "crazy" status.

How about making it illegal to issue marriage licences to anyone, gay or straight ? and various other interestingly obscene-under-the Constitution proposals from assorted Middle America states.

I do like the counter=proposal, one that everyone could help: the only openly-gay legislator says she will expose the marital misdemeanours of each legislator who backs these bills that target her.

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5366 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Siegfried
Ship's ferret
# 29

 - Posted      Profile for Siegfried   Author's homepage   Email Siegfried   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I was referring to other causes of poor treatment. Forget it.

No. You said it, now own it. What are you talking about?

--------------------
Siegfried
Life is just a bowl of cherries!

Posts: 5591 | From: Tallahassee, FL USA | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
saysay

Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645

 - Posted      Profile for saysay   Email saysay   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
I guess the "equality" idea drives some people into "crazy" status.

It's not the "equality" idea that's driving people. I've been on team gay marriage since I was a child in the eighties and knew my first lesbians with a daughter and no legal protections. But in the past seven years, there's been a serious increase in the power of the illiberal left. They have to be fought.

quote:
And the paradox of this within the gay rights movement is an astounding one. For the past twenty years, the open, free-wheeling arguments for marriage equality and military service have persuaded, yes, persuaded, Americans with remarkable speed that reform was right and necessary. Yes: the arguments. If you want to argue that no social progress can come without coercion or suppression of free speech, you have to deal with the empirical fact that old-fashioned liberalism brought gay equality to America far, far faster than identity politics leftism. It was liberalism – not leftism – that gave us this breakthrough. And when Alabama is on the verge of issuing marriage licenses to its citizens, it is the kind of breakthrough that is rightly deemed historic. But instead of absorbing that fact and being proud of it and seeking magnanimity and wondering if other social justice movements might learn from this astonishing success for liberalism and social progress, some on the gay left see only further struggle against an eternally repressive heterosexist regime, demanding more and more sensitivity for slighter and slighter transgressions and actually getting more radicalized – and feeling more victimized and aggrieved – in the process.

Which reveals how dismal this kind of politics is, how bitter and rancid it so quickly becomes, how infantilizing it is.

It doesn't help that the mainstream media has a habit of misrepresenting religious views that it doesn't understand.

--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."

Posts: 2916 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
New to this thread so sorry if I haven't read it all...

My thoughts are that cake baking and cake decorating are public services and unless a baker has a history of being allowed to decorate a cake however they like as a "free artist" then they should basically follow the instructions given by the clients even if the baker has moral objections, which the baker is free to voice to the client (voicing moral objections and refusing service to a client are two different things).

AND THEN I consider a hypothetical case of a baker being asked to bake a cake saying "No intermarriage: keep the races pure," or "Segregation forever," or some other message that is even more explicitly racist, Anti-Semitic, etc. I would think that even a sign maker would have a right to refuse to make a sign with writing like this on it, even if the sign was simply an enlarged reproduction of a printed image given to the sign maker and therefore did not involve any "artistic interpretation" whatsoever. But based on my reasoning above I can't justify this refusal, since here in the US there is no law against racist (or homophobic) speech, as long as you aren't directly encouraging people to commit violence against anyone. What are your thoughts?

Posts: 1485 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  ...  29  30  31 
 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools