By 2016, all social divisions had begun to play out as conflicts over cake decoration: “Louisiana Baker Apologizes After Refusing To Make Teen’s Trump 2016 Cake” [Daily Caller]
By 2016, all social divisions had begun to play out as conflicts over cake decoration: “Louisiana Baker Apologizes After Refusing To Make Teen’s Trump 2016 Cake” [Daily Caller]
3 Comments
Apparently, someone thought “Trump 2016” was copyrighted? Is it? Does it matter? So, it seems Albertson’s is claiming this is NOT a social division (at least as I would define it).
Now, let’s relitigate everything. If a person makes wedding cakes for weddings and there is nothing about the cakes that refers to the sexual preferences of the consumer, should the maker be restricted from denying a wedding cake to a couple based upon his/her beliefs; i.e., interracial, gay, interfaith, second weddings are improper?
On the other hand, if the person makes only wedding cakes that readily identify the characteristics of those married, i.e., gender, race, religion, should the maker be allowed to not make a wedding cake that portrays something he/she does not believe in?
I think that the answer to both is “yes.” Making a cake is not offering an expression about a wedding. Decorating a cake in a specific way may well involve offering an expression about a wedding.
Which brings us to the baker in Lakewood, CO. He said he was willing to provide all baked goods for the gay wedding, just not the cake. He did not say that the cake was in any way more or less of a generic baked good as his other confections.
Finally, there is the Barry Goldwater train of thought that private businesses should be able to make their own decisions, discriminatory or not. Perhaps. But that is not the issue up for debate.
Allan,
In all honesty, your verbal jousting still comes down to the idea that you feel that the state owns people’s work and has the right to make them violate their conscience absent of any harm to anyone..
Apparently, someone thought “Trump 2016” was copyrighted? Is it? Does it matter? So, it seems Albertson’s is claiming this is NOT a social division (at least as I would define it).