Colorado baker loses appeal over refusal to make gender transition cake

[Knob Oddy]

On 1/28/2023 at 5:07 AM, tcgram said:

Refusing to make a cake just because someone's beliefs are different from yours is ludicrous.   

I went to a local butchers. They refused to serve me bacon. They said they don't have any and wouldn't order any in.

The fact that they were all Muslims doesn't mean they can refuse to serve me! Their beliefs mean nothing compared to mine

[Golden Duck]

44 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

I went to a local butchers. They refused to serve me bacon. They said they don't have any and wouldn't order any in.

The fact that they were all Muslims doesn't mean they can refuse to serve me! Their beliefs mean nothing compared to mine

No doubt that butcher had Halal as part of its business name.  Why would you enter asking for bacon?

What's the point of your BS hypothetical?

[spartan max2]

1 hour ago, Knob Oddy said:

I went to a local butchers. They refused to serve me bacon. They said they don't have any and wouldn't order any in.

The fact that they were all Muslims doesn't mean they can refuse to serve me! Their beliefs mean nothing compared to mine

Good job showing your ignorance of the lawsuit.

Butchers are not required to sell bacon. 

It would be discrimination if they did sell bacon, but refused to sell the bacon to you because you're transgender, or black, or Christian or whatever.

Edited January 30, 2023 by spartan max2

[+OverSword]

26 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Butchers are now required to sell bacon. 

 

They are?

[spartan max2]

3 minutes ago, OverSword said:

They are?

Typo. 

They are not.

People aren't required to provide a specific product or service. But if you do provide said product over service than you can't discriminate on to who.

So you don't have to sell bacon. But if you do sell it you can't discriminate 

[Knob Oddy]

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

No doubt that butcher had Halal as part of its business name.  Why would you enter asking for bacon?

What's the point of your BS hypothetical?

It wasnt hypothetical. I asked for bacon at a butcher which was named "north shore butchers".

Only after I asked did I notice everyone in the shop was Muslim. 

My point being is I wanted a leg of lamb and some bacon for my webber. 

The owners and workers religious beliefs prevent me from getting the meat I desired.

[Knob Oddy]

1 hour ago, spartan max2 said:

Good job showing your ignorance of the lawsuit.

Butchers are not required to sell bacon. 

It would be discrimination if they did sell bacon, but refused to sell the bacon to you because you're transgender, or black, or Christian or whatever.

They did give me a shady look when I asked for bacon. I felt judged for my bacon related beliefs (those beliefs are that I can make delicious bacon hot smoked)

[spartan max2]

4 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

It wasnt hypothetical. I asked for bacon at a butcher which was named "north shore butchers".

Only after I asked did I notice everyone in the shop was Muslim. 

My point being is I wanted a leg of lamb and some bacon for my webber. 

The owners and workers religious beliefs prevent me from getting the meat I desired.

That's not comparable to the OP because that's not discrimination.

[Knob Oddy]

2 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

That's not comparable to the OP because that's not discrimination.

OP does not provide "gender affirming" cakes, just other cakes, just like the butchery i went to does not provide bacon, just other meats.

Am I surprised you haven't caught on?

[spartan max2]

6 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

OP does not provide "gender affirming" cakes, just other cakes, just like the butchery i went to does not provide bacon, just other meats.

Am I surprised you haven't caught on?

Now you're being willfully ignorant.

If you sell cakes than you can't discriminate who you sell cake to based on their gender identity. Same if you sell bacon. 

You do not however, have to sell bacon or cakes at all. 

Like you can't sue a grocery store for not selling eggs. That's not discrimination.

Edited January 30, 2023 by spartan max2

[Knob Oddy]

Just now, spartan max2 said:

Now you're being willfully ignorant.

If you sell cakes than you can't discriminate who you sell cake to based on their gender identity. Same if you sell bacon. 

You do not however, have to sell bacon or cakes at all. 

The OP does not provide gender affirmation cakes to anyone, regardless of race, religion, etc.

My butcher doesn't provide bacon to anyone either. 

If I ask for either product at their shops I will be denied.

One is perfectly fine to you, the other not. Makes absolutely no sense.

[spartan max2]

1 minute ago, Knob Oddy said:

The OP does not provide gender affirmation cakes to anyone, regardless of race, religion, etc.

My butcher doesn't provide bacon to anyone either. 

If I ask for either product at their shops I will be denied.

One is perfectly fine to you, the other not. Makes absolutely no sense.

Man you would get absolutely annihilated in court .

[Knob Oddy]

1 minute ago, spartan max2 said:

Man you would get absolutely annihilated in court .

Great argument. 

[spartan max2]

8 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

Great argument. 

When it comes to laws terms such as "product", "service", "discrimination" have definitions.

Unlike here where you clearly just make up your own to serve your bias lol.

A cake is a product. If you sell cakes you can't discriminate as to who you sell to. When purple and pink frosted cakes are sold to not trans people than you can't deny it to trans people. 

Same with bacon. You can't act like "gender affirming cake" is distinct product like bacon is. That's like saying I don't sell "gender affirming bacon". Its meaningless word play to try and justify discrimination.

Hence why the court ruled the way it did. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by spartan max2

[+Desertrat56]

On 1/27/2023 at 9:02 AM, OverSword said:

Link

Oh, good lord!   So a private business is no longer private.   I think people who have a problem with other's choices are not the cream of the crop, but on the other hand, there should be something to back up the choice that shop keepers have when they post a sign that says "I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."    What happened to that?   We can't have a free country if we make these kinds of rules.  The original case was totally stupid as that person could have gone to a different bakery.   What if the proprietor had said, "I would be glad to make your cake but I am over booked and could not get to it until 2 week from now."   Could someone sue for that?   He was stupid to react the way he did, and now look what he has done, given someone legal precedent to sue all kinds of shops for "discrimination".   How does Hobby Lobby and Chick Filet stay in business?   They are huge and have lots of money, that's how.   And until it was in the news most people didn't care what the owners believed except it is inconvienient that they are not open on Sunday.

[spartan max2]

3 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Oh, good lord!   So a private business is no longer private.   I think people who have a problem with other's choices are not the cream of the crop, but on the other hand, there should be something to back up the choice that shop keepers have when they post a sign that says "I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."    What happened to that?   We can't have a free country if we make these kinds of rules.  The original case was totally stupid as that person could have gone to a different bakery.   What if the proprietor had said, "I would be glad to make your cake but I am over booked and could not get to it until 2 week from now."   Could someone sue for that?   He was stupid to react the way he did, and now look what he has done, given someone legal precedent to sue all kinds of shops for "discrimination".   How does Hobby Lobby and Chick Filet stay in business?   They are huge and have lots of money, that's how.   And until it was in the news most people didn't care what the owners believed except it is inconvienient that they are not open on Sunday.

The cake owner wasn't sued for his belief he was sued for discrimination.

If you provide cake to people you can't discriminate who to based on someone's demographics.

Chick-fil-A owner for example has voiced disagreement with gay marriage. His company however does not refuse service to gay people and treats them the same as any other customer. That's the difference.

Now I wouldn't go out of my way to sue someone when there are dozens of other places I could of went for a cake. But at the same time don't discriminate and you won't be open to lawsuits.

Edited January 30, 2023 by spartan max2

[+Desertrat56]

On 1/27/2023 at 9:07 AM, tcgram said:

Refusing to make a cake just because someone's beliefs are different from yours is ludicrous.   

I agree, obviously he didn't need the business, however, he is a private business owner and should be allowed to refuse service when he wants to.

If it were a government subsidized business he would not have that right.    

[+Desertrat56]

On 1/27/2023 at 9:20 AM, OverSword said:

Another thing that is ludicrous is to intentionally target a baker who you know is against homosexuality due to religious beliefs with the express intention of filing a lawsuit.  No actual harm was done to the plaintiff (imo) because they got just what they wanted which was to make the bakers life miserable.  The lawsuit IMO is frivolous.  It's similar to throwing yourself in front of a car you know doesn't have time to stop so you can sue the driver.

Now do I agree with the baker?  Not if all he was asked to make was a pink and blue birthday cake, which seems to be the case.  But at the same time I can't see being enough of a Karen/Ken to go out of my way to do this to someone.

Depends on how the law is written in that state I imagine.  This same guy won a lawsuit concerning being asked to bake a wedding cake for a gay marriage.  

Yep, if that person really wanted the cake he would have gone to another bakery, but it was obviously done for this legal precedent and it worked.   So, be careful and don't step on any cracks or you might end up in court with court costs and fines, we no longer live in a free country.  The attorneys own it.

[+Desertrat56]

10 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

The cake owner wasn't sued for his belief he was sued for discrimination.

If you provide cake to people you can't discriminate who to based on someone's demographics.

Chick-fil-A owner for example has voiced disagreement with gay marriage. His company however does not refuse service to gay people and treats them the same as any other customer. That's the difference.

Now I wouldn't go out of my way to sue someone when there are dozens of other places I could of went for a cake. But at the same time don't discriminate and you won't be open to lawsuits.

But you can choose what kind of cakes and how you will decorate it.  The original lawsuit was manipulation in order to set a legal precedent.  If the baker had taken a different tactic he probably would have won, but freedom of speech has nothing to do with being allowed to refuse service to someone.   You wouldn't go to an amish community and ask them to build you an alter to satan, the one who wanted the cake was more wrong in my opinion with his original law suit.   I don't agree with the cake maker but I definitely don't think he deserved what happened to him.   What should have happened is that word gets out and anyone who disagrees with him can quit buying his cakes.  That is how it is supposed to work.  Getting lawyers involved and the courts stinks of ulterior motive for even going into that cake shop.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Desertrat56

[Golden Duck]

58 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

It wasnt hypothetical. I asked for bacon at a butcher which was named "north shore butchers".

Only after I asked did I notice everyone in the shop was Muslim. 

My point being is I wanted a leg of lamb and some bacon for my webber. 

The owners and workers religious beliefs prevent me from getting the meat I desired.

Calling you out.  Prove they don't advertise as a Halal supplier.

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, spartan max2 said:

The cake owner wasn't sued for his belief he was sued for discrimination.

If you provide cake to people you can't discriminate who to based on someone's demographics.

The difference between this type of thing and the segregated eateries, bathrooms, water fountains, etc. of the last century is that discrimination was law.  If an artist (and cake decorators are artists) they should be able to pick and choose what type of work they do. This is not the same as buying a generic cake from your local Kroger.  The person that filed this suit effectively entrapped someone who they disagree with philosophically, imo, and is not actually an injured party.  The very definition of frivolous law suit.

Here are some actual photos of the baker in question at work.  

     https://masterpiececakes.com/

I have a friend that is an accomplished painter.  When he is selling paintings he frequently is requested to do custom paintings.  Sometimes he will and sometimes he won't depending on his own feelings about the project.  Could he be sued for it?  

Edited January 30, 2023 by OverSword

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Good job showing your ignorance of the lawsuit.

Butchers are not required to sell bacon. 

It would be discrimination if they did sell bacon, but refused to sell the bacon to you because you're transgender, or black, or Christian or whatever.

Bakers are legally required to make cake?

[spartan max2]

11 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Bakers are legally required to make cake?

No. But if you make cakes than you can't discriminate who you sell cakes to. 

[spartan max2]

16 minutes ago, OverSword said:

The difference between this type of thing and the segregated eateries, bathrooms, water fountains, etc. of the last century is that discrimination was law.  If an artist (and cake decorators are artists) they should be able to pick and choose what type of work they do. This is not the same as buying a generic cake from your local Kroger.  The person that filed this suit effectively entrapped someone who they disagree with philosophically, imo, and is not actually an injured party.  The very definition of frivolous law suit.

Here are some actual photos of the baker in question at work.  

     https://masterpiececakes.com/

I have a friend that is an accomplished painter.  When he is selling paintings he frequently is requested to do custom paintings.  Sometimes he will and sometimes he won't depending on his own feelings about the project.  Could he be sued for it?  

That is a good argument. Artist of course shouldn't be forced to make specific custom pieces. Guess it depends on if we consider cake bakers to be in that realm.

For whatever reason the court didn't. Would have to look closer to see why 

[+OverSword]

4 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

No. But if you make cakes than you can't discriminate who you sell cakes to. 

That I agree with.  Custom decorations changes the paradigm IMO.  In this case I think it was a blue cake with pink frosting so he should have just sold the cake (if it is of a type he has on hand)

edit for quote

Quote

For whatever reason the court didn't. Would have to look closer to see why 

Maybe because of what I said here

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by OverSword