Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop Refuses to Bake a Birthday Cake for Transgendered Person

[Ana the Ist]

The “meaning of the decorations” doesn’t enter into it.

You sure?

That’ll be the basis of the ruling.

I doubt it. If this were some large scale national chain maybe....but this is one guy baking and there's consideration for artistic license that has to be addressed.

 

[Pommer]

You sure?




I doubt it. If this were some large scale national chain maybe....but this is one guy baking and there's consideration for artistic license that has to be addressed.

Sell me a cake.
“Okay”
I want it for my KKK rally.
“I’m not selling a cake to you!”

 

[RDKirk]

would it be forced speech or forced artistic expression if the couple were African American?

Yes.

 

[RDKirk]

Normally....but when the client divulged the meaning of the decorations, I think they blew the case.

But that's not what the artist (the cake decorator) meant when he or she or they created the decorations.

Sort of the way people might describe the new statue honoring Ruth Bader Ginsberg as "Satanic," regardless of what the artist intended. From the artist's point of view, those alternate interpretations are irrelevant.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Sell me a cake.
“Okay”
I want it for my KKK rally.
“I’m not selling a cake to you!”

Yeah.....that's more or less the crux of it.

Maybe someone is willing to bake your kkk rally cake but I don't see why anyone would be compelled to.

 

[Ana the Ist]

But that's not what the artist (the cake decorator) meant when he or she or they created the decorations.

I don't think he imbued it with any meaning beyond that of a birthday cake.

However, once the symbolism of the frosting scheme was laid out to him....he learned he was unwittingly participating in something he wouldn't normally do because of his beliefs.

Sort of the way people might describe the new statue honoring Ruth Bader Ginsberg as "Satanic," regardless of what the artist intended. From the artist's point of view, those alternate interpretations are irrelevant.

Haven't seen it. She got a statue?

It's actually quite different...."give me a statue honoring Ruth Bader Ginsburg" is a request allowing for both artistic expression and an opportunity to refuse.


Give me a statue of a little old lady in a robe with a pitchfork is a very different request.....especially when you wait until later to clarify its about RBG.

 

[Pommer]

Yeah.....that's more or less the crux of it.

Maybe someone is willing to bake your kkk rally cake but I don't see why anyone would be compelled to.

If masterpiece cake shop was only open to “members” he’d have a case in this instance; but they’re open to the general public and anyone can order a cake from them regardless of what “function” the cake is for.

 

[Tuur]

if you own a business that is open to the public then it has to be open to all of the public even people you don't happen to like

Odd. That sounds like working for someone, not owning something yourself.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If masterpiece cake shop was only open to “members” he’d have a case in this instance; but they’re open to the general public and anyone can order a cake from them regardless of what “function” the cake is for.

If they were a hardware store selling hammers and nails....yes.

However, they're a bakery that specializes in personalized cakes apparently. He's claiming artistic license.

 

[Tuur]

if it is open to the public then yes it is

Public implies something funded by the public, such as a state highway or a city park. The use with something privately owned has disturbing implications, such as private ownership not really existing.

 

[Tuur]

Private business is still subject to the law. It's not a sovereign fiefdom.


Surely you know this already.

Ironically, the inability of a private business to freely do business strikes me as a feudal noble granting a concession to do business. But then, freedom doesn't seem to be a popular idea anymore.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ironically, the inability of a private business to freely do business strikes me as a feudal noble granting a concession to do business. But then, freedom doesn't seem to be a popular idea anymore.

Well considering that most of the time they're writing these rules for themselves....I'm not too worried about it.

 

[Pommer]

Public implies something funded by the public, such as a state highway or a city park. The use with something privately owned has disturbing implications, such as private ownership not really existing.

Acute and obtuse aren’t just angles, anymore.

 

[Hank77]

If masterpiece cake shop was only open to “members” he’d have a case in this instance; but they’re open to the general public and anyone can order a cake from them regardless of what “function” the cake is for.

He does not have to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding because he no longer makes wedding cakes for anyone.

If this trans woman lawyer had asked him to make a transition celebration cake he could have legally said no. But she tricked him by saying it was just a birthday cake rather than a transition birthday cake. A lawyer knows how to play these legal games.

 

[SilverBear]

Is this a joke?

so no. Nothing to back it up. Thanks

 

[Hank77]

Well considering that most of the time they're writing these rules for themselves....I'm not too worried about it.

I was on Phillips's side when he refused to make the wedding cake. Marriage was established by God and is clearly supported in the Bible for the purpose of building a family with a male and a female as partners.

However, this time it seems different to me, maybe because the whole thing is so sad, people going to such extremes to change themselves into someone they can like, and then so much of the time it doesn't work.

In my opinion, Phillips should have just ignored her goading because that is exactly what she was and is doing. But then she may not win her civil case. Colorado dropped their case against Phillips in this instance and he dropped his against Colorado, she's on her own. I wonder if he can get a jury trial.

 

[SilverBear]

Odd. That sounds like working for someone, not owning something yourself.

No, it sounds like putting the national idea that everyone is equal into action.

 

[SilverBear]

Public implies something funded by the public, such as a state highway or a city park. The use with something privately owned has disturbing implications, such as private ownership not really existing.

Public :
noun 1. ordinary people in general; the community
2. the people of a country, state, city, community etc

 

[variant]

Odd. That sounds like working for someone, not owning something yourself.

If business owners had not used this supposed "right" to refuse service to people for having black skin we might have a better argument for keeping it as a right (in general).

However, not having access to things like gas stations, banks, hotels, places to eat and such is quite obviously an undue burden on the people such racists didn't want to serve.

Now that we're arguing about decorated cakes I explicitly think it's a stupid argument.

It's best to leave people who can't help but be angry all the time to fight that one out.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Some are good. Health and well-being of children is important.

So there are some limits to "business owners rights to conduct business as they see fit." You don't support them universally.