Transcript of Oral Argument Masterpiece Cake Shop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Division

[Maren]

Well, it doesn’t make any sense to conure up a hypo that doesn’t make your point. Indeed, your hypo doesn’t refute my point, or my hypo, exactly because your hypo isn’t parallel. You can most assuredly disagree but your disagreement is in part supported by a poor hypo.

And you are incorrect about your own hypo. In your hypo the refusal of service was because of certain kind of religious event and not the identity of the customer.

1. Your hypo: baker refuses because customer will engage in a specific religious event.

The refusal has nothing to do with identity of the customer. You conjured up a hypo that doesn’t even make your point, that identity of customer was basis of refusal.

And it’s not the age of the marathon runner that’s the basis of refusal. The baker serves 15 year olds!

It is illogical to assert the baker doesn’t want to serve the customer because he’s fifteen when the baker serves customers who are 15. It’s the action of the 15 year old which is the basis of the refusal. We know this to be true because the baker serves 15 year olds!

Finally, the courts do not need to treat the two kinds of marriages differently. You’ve lost sight of what is being argued and litigated.

The Colorado law is the basis of the law at issue. The law prohibits discrimination “because of” certain enumerated characteristics in the statute. The statute is a causation statute. It prohibits discrimination when the cause is some protected characteristic. Ergo, like any causation, if the cause can be shown to be something other than a characteristic in the statute, then the statute isn’t violated.

Respondents argued the refusal, the cause of refusing, was X characteristic in the statute. They attempt to support this claim by showing customers were same sex.

Kennedy retorts it’s not that simple here and questions whether their identity was the cause because the refusal was to their act of marriage, not because they are same sex.

This is a fantastic point by Kennedy since A.) Phillips serves gays, so if refusal is their identity, then why is he serving gays?

So, from this context, it doesn’t matter if the courts treat the two kinds of marriage equally. The issue is the statute and whether refusal was “because of” some characteristic in the statute, and whether courts treat the two kinds of marriages is irrelevant to that issue.

So if the gay couple were getting married in a church, making the wedding a religious event (particularly since many Christian religious view marriage as a sacrament), they'd then be protected since it would be religious discrimination? This, to me, is the issue with your logic -- the issue isn't with the event, instead it is the people participating in the event.

Just like the Jew; the yarmulke is not part of the religious ceremony -- so the event isn't what is being discriminated against -- it is discrimination against the person, for an item he would wear to the event.

 

[Lily of Valleys]

The baker then should refrain from serving all the obese customers they have who are likely committing the sin of gluttony. In the US, that would be about 40 percent of the public.

But the baker wouldn't know if the obese customers are buying the cakes for themselves or for someone else. He also shouldn't deny the obese customers from having a birthday cake to share with their friends either. He did decide not to make cakes that have alcohol in them though:

59. For example, we made a decision that we would not sell any goods with alcohol in them, including coffee drinks or baked goods. This has proven to be a wise decision, since only a few years after we opened, and just a few doors away from our shop, an Alcoholics Anonymous Club opened. If our cakes were an enticement and temptation for something that most of these people (many of whom have become good friends) are trying to control in their lives, how would we be able to love, support and help them, while at the same time promoting one of the things that has devastated many of their lives?

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/16-111-JA.pdf​

 

[Lily of Valleys]

Then the baker's argument falls flat on its face.

How so? His argument is that He believes God's intention for marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and anything else is sinful, and that the Bible commands him not to participate or encourage sin in anyway. He believes that to participate in same-sex weddings by using his gifts, time and talents would violate his core beliefs, the instructions of the Bible and displeasing to God.

45. As the creator of a wedding cake, I believe that I am an important part of the wedding celebration for the couple, and my creations are a central component of the wedding. By creating a wedding cake for the couple, I am an active participant and I am associated with the event.

46. A wedding cake communicates that a wedding has occurred, a marriage has begun, and the couple should be celebrated.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/16-111-JA.pdf​

 

[Lily of Valleys]

Without giving a detailed questionnaire and medical history to his customers, though, the baker should be erring on the side of caution in all of these cases. Is he, or is he only targeting gay customers?

It doesn't seem like he is only targeting gay customers since he serves everyone regardless if they are gay, and same-sex wedding cakes are not the only cakes that he doesn't create.

He sells cakes off the shelf with no question asked, except when the cakes are to be custom-made such as for a wedding, then he would need to ask questions to make sure the cake he designs would suit the couple and the event.

From his affidavit:

55. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc. is closed on Sundays in order to honor God and to allow myself and my employees to attend church.

56. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc. and I gladly serve people of all races, all faiths, all sexual orientations, and all walks of life, and have since the day our doors opened.

59. For example, we made a decision that we would not sell any goods with alcohol in them, including coffee drinks or baked goods. This has proven to be a wise decision, since only a few years after we opened, and just a few doors away from our shop, an Alcoholics Anonymous Club opened. If our cakes were an enticement and temptation for something that most of these people (many of whom have become good friends) are trying to control in their lives, how would we be able to love, support and help them, while at the same time promoting one of the things that has devastated many of their lives?

60. There are many other types of cakes and baked goods that I will not design or create.

61. I will not create cakes that promote anti-American or anti-family themes, a flag-burning or a cake with a hateful message, a terrorist message, a KKK celebration of an atrocity against African Americans, an atheist message such as "God is dead" or "there is no God," or even simply vulgarity or profanity on a cake.

63. Additionally, I will not create or sell Halloween cakes, cookies, brownies or anything else related to this day because of my sincerely held religious beliefs.

67. I will not design and create wedding cakes for a same-sex wedding regardless of the sexual orientation of the customer. Conversely, I will design and create wedding cakes for the wedding of one man and one woman, regardless of the sexual orientation of the customer. If a gay person asked me to design and create a wedding cake for the wedding of a man and a woman, I would happily do so. But if a straight person asked me to design and create a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding, I would not do so. Whether the customer is gay or straight is not important to me. I don’t care who anybody is attracted to and don’t ask. My decision on designing and creating wedding cakes has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the customer. It has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of anyone.

68. For example, a woman asked us to create a simple sheet cake with a photo transfer of two men on a cake. She advised me that it was for the men’s wedding. I replied that I don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings. I don’t know if she was homosexual or not, if she was ordering the cake on her own, or if she was ordering it for the two men. To me it didn’t matter whether she was ‘straight’ or not. I wasn’t turning her away, I was rejecting the cake for the same sex wedding. It did not matter who was ordering it.​

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/16-111-JA.pdf​

 

[Lily of Valleys]

I'd have a bit more sympathy if people just came clean on this point rather than the tortured rationalizations we've had to suffer through in this thread.

Given the history of gay-hate crimes, it is pretty natural for people to assume disagreement with homosexual acts equate animosity towards homosexuals as humans. Keep in mind that the majority of people who commit those hate crimes are not Christians though.

 

[Lily of Valleys]

All I am saying is; allow the Christians who don't want to serve a same sex wedding, the chance to legally do so, as long as they provide the public with the courtesy, of informing them by posting this policy for that public they are inviting in their door, to see.

There is actually a recently passed law in Mississippi called "Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act" to protect people who hold religious beliefs or moral convictions that marriage is the union of one and one woman, from being persecuted because of those beliefs. So if Masterpiece Cakeshop and Sweet Cakes by Melissa were in Mississippi, they would have been protected and not punished by their state government.

HB1523 (As Sent to Governor) - 2016 Regular Session

 

[TLK Valentine]

Absolutely. There actually is a book about that from the mid 20th century called Diary of Ann Frank.

I do wish I could be surprised and/or disappointed at this Godwin...

 

[TLK Valentine]

That's what one would expect to hear from an employer to an employee, not a bystander to a business owner, or the government to a private citizen. But it kind of makes you wonder who is seen as master and who is servant here.

Well, considering that the business serves the customer, I'd say that question is asked and answered.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, that is exactly what most slaves do. But sometimes they take it to the supreme court.

It's also what most adults do... The magical place where you'll never be forced into unpleasant situations is promised in the next life, not this one.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ever heard of a Constitutionalist who never read
the Constitution or promotes Communism? It's
a contradiction in terms.

Ever hear of a Christian who has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?

Once you know Him, what's the book for?

 

[TLK Valentine]

How so? His argument is that He believes God's intention for marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and anything else is sinful, and that the Bible commands him not to participate or encourage sin in anyway. He believes that to participate in same-sex weddings by using his gifts, time and talents would violate his core beliefs, the instructions of the Bible and displeasing to God.

[/QUOTE]

But God also says not to engage in the worship or celebration of any "strange gods" before Him -- in fact, He's quite adamant about that.

Luckily, our baking friend has found a convenient loophole, by disassociating himself from the ceremony he's helping to celebrate.

45. As the creator of a wedding cake, I believe that I am an important part of the wedding celebration for the couple, and my creations are a central component of the wedding. By creating a wedding cake for the couple, I am an active participant and I am associated with the event.

46. A wedding cake communicates that a wedding has occurred, a marriage has begun, and the couple should be celebrated.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/16-111-JA.pdf​

And our baking friend obviously has no issues with weddings in general, as he participates in them regularly... this time, however, he has an issue because of the people involved...

He'll happily accept Jewish money, Muslim money, Atheist money... but gay money? Now that's just icky.

 

[Almost there]

I do wish I could be surprised and/or disappointed at this Godwin...

I violate Godwin's law with impunity. I do not respect that law nor give it any authority. It is merely an attempt to silence those who would call out behavior clearly analogous to what the nazi's did.

In this case, it applies. The idea that it's ok to violate people's rights because "it's the law" is the Nazi excuse.

 

[Almost there]

It's also what most adults do... The magical place where you'll never be forced into unpleasant situations is promised in the next life, not this one.

So you are basically making the argument that our founding fathers were wrong, and a few decades later we should have just let the south secede?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I violate Godwin's law with impunity. I do not respect that law nor give it any authority. It is merely an attempt to silence those who would call out behavior clearly analogous to what the nazi's did.

In this case, it applies. The idea that it's ok to violate people's rights because "it's the law" is the Nazi excuse.

...including the right to say, "we don't serve your kind here."

Godwin cuts both ways, you know:

 

[TLK Valentine]

So you are basically making the argument that our founding fathers were wrong, and a few decades later we should have just let the south secede?

Not at all -- feel free to fight for your rights, Including the right to say, "we don't serve your kind here"; Try not to act surprised when people fight back.

 

[Almost there]

...including the right to say, "we don't serve your kind here."

Godwin cuts both ways, you know:

Ah, but they didn't say "we don't serve your kind here". They didn't want to serve an event that violates their religious beliefs.

But that even misses the point. Read up on how Jewish business owners were treated in the 30's in Nazi Germany.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ah, but they didn't say "we don't serve your kind here". They didn't want to serve an event that violates their religious beliefs.

Because their kind's very existence violates their religious beliefs, but there's nothing to be done about that -- until now, perhaps.

But that even misses the point. Read up on how Jewish business owners were treated in the 30's in Nazi Germany.

I'm well aware of it. Read up on how Jewish people were treated in the 30s in Nazi Germany... while your at it, read n on how the suspected homosexuals were treated as well.

 

[Almost there]

Because their kind's very existence violates their religious beliefs...

That is false.

I'm well aware of it. Read up on how Jewish people were treated in the 30s in Nazi Germany... while your at it, read n on how the suspected homosexuals were treated as well.

Yes. their attitude about Homosexuals was quite bit different from our attitude about them in the US. We have a "live and let live" attitude. At least, we do on the right. Our mantra can be summed up, really, in three words, regarding the government: Leave me alone.

 

[Belk]

That is false.

Yes. their attitude about Homosexuals was quite bit different from our attitude about them in the US. We have a "live and let live" attitude. At least, we do on the right. Our mantra can be summed up, really, in three words, regarding the government: Leave me alone.

I have seen a way to many people on the right pushing policies that actively discriminate against homosexuals to find that credible.

 

[bhsmte]

That is false.

Yes. their attitude about Homosexuals was quite bit different from our attitude about them in the US. We have a "live and let live" attitude. At least, we do on the right. Our mantra can be summed up, really, in three words, regarding the government: Leave me alone.

Live and let live until certain people walk into a public accommodating business and then they are told they can't live there.