Baker Refuses to Sell Cake to Gay Couple

[+ Gar1eth]

Just A Question--Don't Kill The Messenger

 

So we all pretty much agree that the Baker needs to take all comers. But what if instead of being gay, the woman looking around for a cake was a white supremacist skin head with swastika tattoos and the like. She is marrying her boyfriend--the head of the White Supremacist Group. The Baker has to bake a cake for them too, right?

 

 

Gman

[Kevin Slater]

So we all pretty much agree that the Baker needs to take all comers. But what if instead of being gay, the woman looking around for a cake was a white supremacist skin head with swastika tattoos and the like. She is marrying her boyfriend--the head of the White Supremacist Group. The Baker has to bake a cake for them too, right?

 

No, she doesn't have to (although I say she probably should). White supremacists aren't a protected class, meaning the law being discussed doesn't require that they be publicly accommodated.

 

Kevin Slater

[Xander]

I believe a Bakery for a formal private event (wedding) is not a public service. Public Service would be hotels, doctors, walmart, etc.

 

Gays don't need to be a protected class. Look at how much flack blacks get in the workplace ("oh he's just an affirmative action hire "). But I am also of the opinion that forcing diversity on others is as immoral as racism.

[Guest boiworship08]

You mean like those who put in their dating profile NO ASIANS? Same thing to me. Both examples of bigotry no matter how much we want to dress it up ....

 

I'm not sure expressing an ethnic preference in dating is bigotry.

[jgoo]

I'm not sure expressing an ethnic preference in dating is bigotry.

 

I agree that it is not necessarily bigotry and is more of a kind of discrimination...one that is legal and pretty much acceptable because we all have preferences in things that are personal to us.

 

It will be interesting to see if there are any legal repercussions for the bakery as a result, assuming the gay couple files a complaint. I suppose they could also make a civil case out of it.

[Kevin Slater]

I believe a Bakery for a formal private event (wedding) is not a public service. Public Service would be hotels, doctors, walmart, etc.

 

42 USC § 12181 specifically lists bakeries as public accommodations. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181 Lodges, fraternal organizations and private clubs would not be public accommodations, but places that engage in commerce with the general public are.

 

Gays don't need to be a protected class.

 

If we want a shot at overturning DoMA, we had better be. That's the crux of nearly every gay rights case before the courts today.

 

Kevin Slater

[Rick Munroe]

Gays don't need to be a protected class.

 

You're absolutely right. Who cares if we can still be fired from our jobs in 29 states just because we're gay? We do not need any protections. We do not need ENDA. Screw that.

 

I am also of the opinion that forcing diversity on others is as immoral as racism.

 

WOW. To even hold the opinion that there's such a thing as "forcing diversity on others," one has to already be a racist. Otherwise, there's no "forcing." So, you would love to have the Civil Rights Act of 1964 repealed? You know, that major piece of legislation that outlawed discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities and women, and ended racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public? That law "forced diversity on others." How immoral.

[Guy Fawkes]

Vote with our wallets...

 

There you go; The correct solution is that we vote with our wallets. Let's go down the street and spend our Gay dollars at the Gay Friendly bakery.

 

There is a story that I'm trying to track down. According to the story one of the east coast Gay destinations created some upset and to prove a point the Gay Visitors spend a weekend spending only two dollar bills. According to the story, the point was easily made and the "Gay Friendlyness" went up substantially.

 

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2-bill-courtesy-en.wikipedia.org_.jpg

 

 

Urban Legend or Real McCoy?

 

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/0401/insider_ap_cmccoy1_576.jpg

[Jaker27]

I believe a Bakery for a formal private event (wedding) is not a public service. Public Service would be hotels, doctors, walmart, etc.

I think you got it wrong. Private service means the bakery providing a service to just their friends or family. Public service means advertising yourself as a service to ALL members of a community.

[Kevin Slater]

According to the story one of the east coast Gay destinations created some upset and to prove a point the Gay Visitors spend a weekend spending only two dollar bills. According to the story, the point was easily made and the "Gay Friendlyness" went up substantially.

 

Shouldn't that be three dollar bills?

 

Kevin Slater

[Frequentflier]

I think Merck Foundation's and other donors pulling their cash from supporting the Boy Scouts had some effect on that groups apparent migration towards open and equal treatment of gays. An online petition signed by hundreds of thousands, a more open newer generation and Ryan Andersen and his Mom doing lots of TV interviews didn't hurt either. Its the pile it on approach that I think will continue to move us faster. Anti discrimination laws, economics, etc. - "Resistance is futile". I won't spend money at Chick Fil A. Won't spend at Whole Foods or Papa Johns. Fair number of websites that list businesses that are gay friendly so easy to spend to support good (business) people.

 

I've been the CEO of a few businesses and would make negative comments about a class of people or advocating any form of discrimination (directly or indirectly). Not my personality, wouldn't have been viewed well by those who worked for the company and of course - who wants to drive away business. That behavior baffles me. What saddens me is how Chick Fil A sales go UP when its leaders evil is highlighted. Shows how much the gene pool still needs improving. I take hope in knowing a large number of younger people in the Northwest Major city I live in that are blind to color, gender, race and who their friends choose to love. And its like behind their eyes they look at mean people in older generations with the knowledge the "aging and natural death will cure your ills" along with a look of "I just don't get you". Beautiful and promising. I'm not naive to think that in some parts of the country younger people aren't being raised as "intelligently". I still rejoice that November 6, 2012 came out as it did. He may not be perfect but the other guy wouldn't support what we need and are gaining on.

[leigh.bess.toad]

I believe a Bakery for a formal private event (wedding) is not a public service. Public Service would be hotels, doctors, walmart, etc.

 

Gays don't need to be a protected class. Look at how much flack blacks get in the workplace ("oh he's just an affirmative action hire "). But I am also of the opinion that forcing diversity on others is as immoral as racism.

 

Sorry Xander, but you are plain and simply wrong. By the letter of the law. The law is clear. First off, how is this guy different from Walmart other than size (and Walmart has a bakery). But the Oregon law is clear: "A place of public accommodation is defined in state law as any place that offers the public accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges, whether in the nature of goods, services, lodging, amusements or otherwise. It is illegal to discriminate in places of public accommodation on the basis of race, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, national origin, religion, marital status, physical or mental disability, or age (18 years of age and older). " Goods or services. Legally he cannot discriminate against this couple. Morally, it is reprehensible, just as it was for Woolworth's to deny blacks service at their lunch counters in the south in the 1950's. Should the blacks merely have "taken it"? Should they have not demanded to be able to sit at the front of the bus, because it really didn't matter since the bus went where they are going. What's the difference? How about those separate but equal water fountains? The water came from the same place so what's the big deal?

 

Discrimination, no matter who is the victim, is unconscionable. And when it is clearly illegal, the laws need to be enforced. You are far too young to understand the lessons of the civil rights movement. You weren't there. I was. To this day, I know the exact date MLK was shot, and where I was and what I was doing. And as you know, I'm a white man. I was only 12 years old. I remember the struggles in DC as a young man over blacks being allowed into the swimming pool at Glen Echo Park. I lived through the riots in DC following MLK's assassination. We cannot as a society tolerate any discrimination, especially when it is a business which is granted a public business license.

 

Of course, we could always let lunch counters discriminate against blacks again.

[Rick Munroe]

Well put, Lee. I like when you get riled up!

[Frequentflier]

You are far too young to understand the lessons of the civil rights movement.

 

And I hope that when Xander's children are the age he is today that they won't know what discrimination is and he'll have to share his life experiences. I didn't grow up watching other people disrespected by being denied seating wherever they wanted, as one example shared above. I hope that would have horrified me. Alternatively, some members of my white family disliked Italians...yes, you read that right. Today, some of those same people have Italians as good friends. I've told that to some acquaintances who are of Italian heritage but speak disparagingly of black people - it was quite an awakening for them to become aware that they aren't exempt from being discriminated against or spoke poorly of solely because of their background. That started them on the road to examine their own views. The perpetrator becomes the victim. Like the sentence above says well, "Discrimination, no matter who is the victim, is unconscionable".

[Strafe13]

This. Very well said, Leigh.

 

Sorry Xander, but you are plain and simply wrong. By the letter of the law. The law is clear. First off, how is this guy different from Walmart other than size (and Walmart has a bakery). But the Oregon law is clear: "A place of public accommodation is defined in state law as any place that offers the public accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges, whether in the nature of goods, services, lodging, amusements or otherwise. It is illegal to discriminate in places of public accommodation on the basis of race, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, national origin, religion, marital status, physical or mental disability, or age (18 years of age and older). " Goods or services. Legally he cannot discriminate against this couple. Morally, it is reprehensible, just as it was for Woolworth's to deny blacks service at their lunch counters in the south in the 1950's. Should the blacks merely have "taken it"? Should they have not demanded to be able to sit at the front of the bus, because it really didn't matter since the bus went where they are going. What's the difference? How about those separate but equal water fountains? The water came from the same place so what's the big deal?

 

Discrimination, no matter who is the victim, is unconscionable. And when it is clearly illegal, the laws need to be enforced. You are far too young to understand the lessons of the civil rights movement. You weren't there. I was. To this day, I know the exact date MLK was shot, and where I was and what I was doing. And as you know, I'm a white man. I was only 12 years old. I remember the struggles in DC as a young man over blacks being allowed into the swimming pool at Glen Echo Park. I lived through the riots in DC following MLK's assassination. We cannot as a society tolerate any discrimination, especially when it is a business which is granted a public business license.

 

Of course, we could always let lunch counters discriminate against blacks again.

[leigh.bess.toad]

Well put, Lee. I like when you get riled up!

 

Thanks Rick. Riled up and ready to go. As it is with this case, I am part of that group being discriminated against. But the same feelings were there when it was the black couple last year who was turned away from a church in Mississippi they attended when they asked to be married in the church. The congregation didn't want any blacks marrying in their church. Unfortunately in that case, the law was, as it should be, powerless to intervene. But ridicule and scorn from the court of public opinion was certainly deserved. I don't like discrimination against any group. One of my favorite quotes is from Martin Niemöller.

 

 

 

First they came for the communists,

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

 

Then they came for the socialists,

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

 

Then they came for the trade unionists,

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

 

Then they came for me,

and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

If all people of good will speak out against discrimination of any sort, it can be beaten back. All it takes for evil to triumph is for men of good will to do nothing. A threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

[Guest]

I won't spend money at Chick Fil A. Won't spend at Whole Foods or Papa Johns. Fair number of websites that list businesses that are gay friendly so easy to spend to support good (business) people.

I must have missed something. Is there something anti-gay about Whole Foods?

[Rick Munroe]

I don't like discrimination against any group. One of my favorite quotes is from Martin Niemöller.

 

I often think of that quote! I've had discussions with friends who don't see anything wrong with the U.S. targeting Muslims (whether it's spying on Muslim New Yorkers or just killing them with drones "over there") and I always tell them that their opinion will change when it's directed at them. Probably already is anyway but they don't realize it.

[Xander]

You're absolutely right. Who cares if we can still be fired from our jobs in 29 states just because we're gay? We do not need any protections. We do not need ENDA. Screw that.

 

 

 

WOW. To even hold the opinion that there's such a thing as "forcing diversity on others," one has to already be a racist. Otherwise, there's no "forcing." So, you would love to have the Civil Rights Act of 1964 repealed? You know, that major piece of legislation that outlawed discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities and women, and ended racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public? That law "forced diversity on others." How immoral.

 

The CRA is an unfortunate thing. It is equally as unfortunate as the racism that caused it into its existence. Do I wish that the CRA didn't exist? Yes, of course I wish it didn't have to exist. But its existence doesn't change the fact that there are bigots out there in the world. In business we have to deal with the CRA day to day due to the uneducated. I view it as a "dumb tax" -- we are literally taxing our country due to the idiocy of itself.

 

Rick -- if you are "forcing diversity" it is not implying that somebody is a racist/bigot. Do you disagree? Alright, let's say you open a business with your friends in Atlanta. You have 16 employees. You recently moved to Atlanta due to the tax excemptions given to new businesses. All of your friends, whom you have hired, come with you from Texas. Only 10% (let's say, 1 employee of the other 15, 1 not yourself) of your employees are black. You start up shop and you realize that this black employee is not up to standards. You, being a new business, don't have the attorneys/resources to fully document and protect yourself against an EEOC claim after you fire him. You fire him, and because the black average is something around 40% he has a stunning claim to present to the EEOC -- That "You fired the last black employee because you are a bigot.". He hires a good attorney, you lose lots of money.

 

I do not want to be a part of a protected class. I simply could not tolerate whispers going on behind my back that I was "simply an affirmative action hire".

 

Perhaps, JUST PERHAPS, you should pick a career, job, life-calling etc. that wouldn't involve working for a company that would fire you due to your sexual orientation? Hell, start your own business.

 

As for gay marriage -- marriage is not an affair for the government. It is an affair for the church. The federal government should only trivialize itself with civil unions. Marriage, love-rituals, or whatever it is you want to call them -- that is a matter for your priest/pope/dog/witch-doctor.

 

You know, when I was 16 I led a bunch of gay rights protests, had a huge blog and was interviewed all over the US. During interviews people started asking me what I really thought when it came to the cold-hard legislation. I was under fire then, and I'm still under fire for my beliefs.

 

And Lee -- Gays have in no way gone through what the blacks have. And we're not going to.

[Xander]

42 USC § 12181 specifically lists bakeries as public accommodations. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181 Lodges, fraternal organizations and private clubs would not be public accommodations, but places that engage in commerce with the general public are.

 

 

 

If we want a shot at overturning DoMA, we had better be. That's the crux of nearly every gay rights case before the courts today.

 

Kevin Slater

 

Only if they affect COMMERCE.

 

Commerce is defined:

 

(1) Commerce

The term “commerce” means travel, trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication—

(A) among the several States;

(B) between any foreign country or any territory or possession and any State; or

© between points in the same State but through another State or foreign country.

 

Look folks, I wish the bakery didn't want to do this. But they did, and I believe they have a right to do so.

 

VOTE. WITH. YOUR. DOLLARS.

 

I am ending my part of the discussion here. If you'd like to continue the discourse with me please send me a private message.

[+ deej]

Look folks, I wish the bakery didn't want to do this. But they did, and I believe they have a right to do so.

 

The Oregon department of justice disagrees with you, as do I.

 

There is news on this story, though. Celebrity chef/baker, star of "Ace of Cakes", Duff Goldman has offered the couple a wedding cake for free. Goldman called the bakery owner who denied the couple "small" and "petty".

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/duff-goldman-gay-wedding-cake-offer-oregon-lesbians_n_2617583.html

 

If I wasn't already a fan of the big doofus, this would do it.

[+ Charlie]

I am old enough to have been legally refused service in a restaurant because my companion was black. I am old enough to have been refused service in a diner which put up a sign that said "We don't serve faggots." (Both of those public accommodations were in the North, by the way, not the South.) It took a lot of work by a lot of people to get those practices declared illegal, and I have no doubt that there are businesses that would reinstate such practices if the civil rights laws lapsed. I don't particularly like having to be part of a "protected class," but I think it is still very necessary.

 

That being said, I understand the feelings of a small business owner who is constrained by law to do something which she finds personally offensive, especially if she could refuse to do something else which she finds equally offensive (like decorate a cake with a Nazi symbol) because that is not illegal. But if she advertises her business as a public accommodation, then she has to accept the consequences of that decision. Of course, if I were the wedding couple, I would not want to patronize her bakery anyway, and I would be leery of eating any cake that she made for me.

[jgoo]

The Oregon department of justice disagrees with you, as do I.

 

I understand a complaint has been filed and they are investigating but not aware of any findings by the Oregon department of justice just yet. What have they concluded and how are they proceeding against the baker? Not commenting on the merits of the case specifically but I speculated earlier that some type of legal action, perhaps civil if not pursued by city/state/federal authorities, would be forthcoming.

[Frequentflier]

The CRA is an unfortunate thing. It is equally as unfortunate as the racism that caused it into its existence. Do I wish that the CRA didn't exist? Yes, of course I wish it didn't have to exist. But its existence doesn't change the fact that there are bigots out there in the world. In business we have to deal with the CRA day to day due to the uneducated. I view it as a "dumb tax" -- we are literally taxing our country due to the idiocy of itself.

 

Rick -- if you are "forcing diversity" it is not implying that somebody is a racist/bigot. Do you disagree? Alright, let's say you open a business with your friends in Atlanta. You have 16 employees. You recently moved to Atlanta due to the tax excemptions given to new businesses. All of your friends, whom you have hired, come with you from Texas. Only 10% (let's say, 1 employee of the other 15, 1 not yourself) of your employees are black. You start up shop and you realize that this black employee is not up to standards. You, being a new business, don't have the attorneys/resources to fully document and protect yourself against an EEOC claim after you fire him. You fire him, and because the black average is something around 40% he has a stunning claim to present to the EEOC -- That "You fired the last black employee because you are a bigot.". He hires a good attorney, you lose lots of money.

 

I do not want to be a part of a protected class. I simply could not tolerate whispers going on behind my back that I was "simply an affirmative action hire".

 

Perhaps, JUST PERHAPS, you should pick a career, job, life-calling etc. that wouldn't involve working for a company that would fire you due to your sexual orientation? Hell, start your own business.

 

As for gay marriage -- marriage is not an affair for the government. It is an affair for the church. The federal government should only trivialize itself with civil unions. Marriage, love-rituals, or whatever it is you want to call them -- that is a matter for your priest/pope/dog/witch-doctor.

 

You know, when I was 16 I led a bunch of gay rights protests, had a huge blog and was interviewed all over the US. During interviews people started asking me what I really thought when it came to the cold-hard legislation. I was under fire then, and I'm still under fire for my beliefs.

 

And Lee -- Gays have in no way gone through what the blacks have. And we're not going to.

 

Incredulous...and not in a good way...

[Frequentflier]

That being said, I understand the feelings of a small business owner who is constrained by law to do something which she finds personally offensive, especially if she could refuse to do something else which she finds equally offensive (like decorate a cake with a Nazi symbol) because that is not illegal. But if she advertises her business as a public accommodation, then she has to accept the consequences of that decision. Of course, if I were the wedding couple, I would not want to patronize her bakery anyway, and I would be leery of eating any cake that she made for me.

 

Exactly ! And if one doesn't want to operate a business within the law I say they are welcome to move deep into the woods and not infect society for the remainder of us. Be civilized or be gone. Nobody should be allowed to essentially operate a business with a sign that reads "no blacks, no jews, no gays", etc. That kind of hatred is a slippery slope and we know that from history. It shows poor moral character and typically leads to even more abhorrent behavior.