In 2012, a gay couple sued a Colorado Baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for them. Why would they want to eat a cake baked by a homophobe on happiest day of their lives?
It’s not that they sued as a result of they needed a cake, it’s as a result of they felt discriminated in opposition to.
Imagine this query rephrased as “A black man sued a restaurant because they refused him service when he went to get dinner for his birthday. Why would he want to celebrate his birthday at a racist restaurant?” He didn’t.
You would possibly as nicely ask, “Why would Black people want to ride in the front of the bus when that’s where all the racist white people are sitting?”
Why ought to any homosexual couple need to undergo the ache within the ass and humiliation of determining which bakers of their space are homophobic or not within the first place?
Imagine that each personal enterprise in an space was allowed to go “I’m not doing business with you, you’re gay.” You attempt to go to the grocery store, they kick you out for being homosexual. You wish to get fuel on your automobile, and so they refuse to serve you since you’re homosexual. You go to McDonalds, and no Big Mac for you, since you’re homosexual.
If that was allowed (and it was once!) life could be hell for a homosexual particular person.
That’s the explanation behind the lawsuit. And why the Supreme Court has lately positioned being LGBT in the identical class as being black, Christian, handicapped, feminine or different qualities that we do not let individuals discriminate for.
Pretty certain they sued due to discrimination not as a result of they needed to eat a cake made by a homophobe.
I used to be residing in Japan when these circumstances began exhibiting up and Japanese folks have been asking me, why is it discrimination if it’s a non-public enterprise? And I mentioned that we Americans know from expertise that if one store will get away with it then finally each store in some cities will probably be unavailable to a sure class of individuals. It’s not simply hypothetical; it has actually occurred.
Cake man gained although
OP missed the purpose
Yeah this was a fairly sticky case all collectively. Apparently the couple had seemed round at a number of locations and located one which refused to do it. Also a marriage cake might be the premiere service a baker can promote with the best price ticket and the client most prepared to spend cash on, so its bizarre to pressure them to do that in opposition to their will in order that they’ve their largest revenue margins. If you wish to punish folks for having backwards views, giving them your corporation despite these looks like the worst method to get again at them.
Because they intentionally have been on the lookout for somebody to reject them so they may sue.
There are experiences of that very same couple going to different bakeries who informed them sure, however they selected to maintain wanting till they discovered one which informed them no.
I’ve so as to add as effectively, the baker was effectively inside his first modification rights to refuse them service. It’s protected beneath the “freedom of association” half. Whether you assume he’s morally flawed is one other matter, however he was objectively inside his constitutional rights.
EDIT: the baker additionally was completely prepared to promote them considered one of his pre-made marriage ceremony truffles or one with out personalization. He merely refused to place their requested personalizations on it.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.