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

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,211.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Religion is supposed to be protected from government, I personally think this is an assault on moral and religious convictions.

The baker is free to believe and worship as he wishes. The no religious freedom issue here. All he has to do is bake a cake for a customer just like he would for any other. Nothing at all to do with religious beliefs or practice.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The baker is free to believe and worship as he wishes. The no religious freedom issue here. All he has to do is bake a cake for a customer just like he would for any other. Nothing at all to do with religious beliefs or practice.
It has everything to do with his religious expression in response to a union he believes to be sinfull. The Colorado law prosecutes his refusal as a crime which is a dangerous precedent. This slippery slope is turning into a cliff, Ive always knew it would because culture war issues always do. Wedding cakes are not Constitionally protected rights, the free exercise of religion is, or at least was.
 
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,211.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It has everything to do with his religious expression in response to a union he believes to be sinfull. The Colorado law prosecutes his refusal as a crime which is a dangerous precedent.

People said the same things two generations ago when they were forced to do business with black people. Their religious life didn't end then, it won't now.

Wedding cakes are not Constitionally protected rights

Neither is being able to ignore the law because you claim you really, really believe really hard.
 
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,211.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
That's it.
I thought the baker testified he wouldn't sell any wedding cake to a gay couple - custom or not. There's an interesting lack of consistency in the arguments made in his favor. Almost as if they're ad hoc rationalizations to try to justify why gay people don't deserve the same treatment as the rest of his customers.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I thought the baker testified he wouldn't sell any wedding cake to a gay couple - custom or not. There's an interesting lack of consistency in the arguments made in his favor. Almost as if they're ad hoc rationalizations to try to justify why gay people don't deserve the same treatment as the rest of his customers.
His wedding cakes are all custom made. They could have bought anything in the store that was already made, including a cake.

A gay couple could have bought a custom cake for a m/f marriage celebration event.

Gay couple comes into the store. One of them says, "We'd like to buy a wedding cake for my sister. We want to spend up to $800. Could I leave my CC information with you? Do you have a business card that I can give to her?"
Would this be a problem for this baker, Phillips? No, he doesn't turn away gay customers.
But he doesn't design and make, create, custom cakes for certain events.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
It has everything to do with his religious expression in response to a union he believes to be sinfull.

Like, for example, the union between a black man and a white woman?

The Colorado law prosecutes his refusal as a crime which is a dangerous precedent. This slippery slope is turning into a cliff, Ive always knew it would because culture war issues always do. Wedding cakes are not Constitionally protected rights, the free exercise of religion is, or at least was.

Including the right for a businessman to tell someone, "we don't serve your kind here."
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
His wedding cakes are all custom made. They could have bought anything in the store that was already made, including a cake.

A cake for a wedding would be a wedding cake. These people needed a wedding cake. A birthday cake simply wouldn't do.

A gay couple could have bought a custom cake for a m/f marriage celebration event.

Gay couple comes into the store. One of them says, "We'd like to buy a wedding cake for my sister. We want to spend up to $800. Could I leave my CC information with you? Do you have a business card that I can give to her?"
Would this be a problem for this baker, Phillips? No, he doesn't turn away gay customers.
But he doesn't design and make, create, custom cakes for certain events.

As long as the customer lies, the baker will oblige?
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Like, for example, the union between a black man and a white woman?

That's not described as an abomination or the result if vial passions. There is no connection of racial discrimination to New Testament theism but intercourse between people of the same gender is clearly identified as gross sexual immorality, inordinate affection and a perversion of the natural use of the body. Your equivocation fallacy is a common mistake, they a two different things.



Including the right for a businessman to tell someone, "we don't serve your kind here."

He has a right to religious and moral objections to participating in a union he considers morally and spiritually repugnant. When the sodomy laws were declared unconstitutional over privacy issues I actually agreed. When the Defense of Marriage and don't ask don't tell was tossed I was not worried about it, actually considered it the result of sound political activism. Proposition 8 was the watershed moment and now refusing to bake a cake is now supposed to be treated as a criminal act. I'm beyond disturbed, I'm appalled.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That's not described as an abomination or the result if vial passions.

Described where?

There is no connection of racial discrimination to New Testament theism

All. Completely. Irrelevant.

Allow me to point out the relevant part of your post:

It has everything to do with his religious expression in response to a union he believes to be sinfull.[sic]

See the issue here?
 
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,211.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
His wedding cakes are all custom made. They could have bought anything in the store that was already made, including a cake.

Even if the baker knew it was going to be used for a wedding? I thought the whole point was that he was an active participant in anything his baked goods were used it, so I'm not sure that this approach would work.

A gay couple could have bought a custom cake for a m/f marriage celebration event.

And every other customer except for them could buy a cake for their own weddings.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,211.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
A cake for a wedding would be a wedding cake. These people needed a wedding cake

Maybe the gay couple should have just bought a straight wedding cake and used it in their gay wedding reception. After all, the spin here says he'd sell one of those to any customer. I think we all know what would happen if they tried, mostly because everyone knows there's no such thing as straight or gay cakes, just straight and gay customers.

As long as the customer lies, the baker will oblige?

Sounds like someone's encouraging people to bear false witness. Seems like a bad idea .. a least if the business owner is telling the truth about caring about what the Bible says. But it would be perfectly consistent with this being a transparent excuse for discriminating against icky gay customers.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
His wedding cakes are all custom made. They could have bought anything in the store that was already made, including a cake.

A gay couple could have bought a custom cake for a m/f marriage celebration event.

Gay couple comes into the store. One of them says, "We'd like to buy a wedding cake for my sister. We want to spend up to $800. Could I leave my CC information with you? Do you have a business card that I can give to her?"
Would this be a problem for this baker, Phillips? No, he doesn't turn away gay customers.
But he doesn't design and make, create, custom cakes for certain events.

The baker makes custom wedding cakes as a normal course of his business, correct?
 
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
8,118
4,528
✟269,140.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I don't get how this is a free speech issue when it more a free exercise of religion. This has set the case up for failure since whether or not this an exercise of Constitionally protected speech isn't a real question. The genie is out of the bottle, gay rights activists should be carefully what they ask for. This trend in Constitional law is dangerous and ripe for abuse. If the Supreme Court upholds the lower courts finding this will ruin this bakers life, the Colorado law reads like a criminal indictment. Religion is supposed to be protected from government, I personally think this is an assault on moral and religious convictions.

except it's the same ruling from 40 years ago with exact same arguments in defense of the bakers. it was already ruled back then, religion isn't a defense against breaking descrimination laws. Saying it's your deeply held religious beliefs so you should get to ignore descrimination laws is no better then, "I don't want blacks eating in my resteraunt because they have the sin of ham." that was argued years ago. And is a FAR FAR more can of worms allowing religious conviction/beliefs to supercede laws. Oh I don't want gays shopping at my store, and so on.

The defense of free speech while still bad, at least limits what can or can't be done somewhat, still opens the door for, "I don't want gays in my resteraunt." since one could argue any cooking is art or such, but it's a different argument with a different slippery slope and different can of worms.
 
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
8,118
4,528
✟269,140.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The law as done with other cases is, bake a generic "straight" wedding cake what ever that is, just like a generic birthday cake that some seem to think they could have used as their wedding cake. Nothing more, most bakers have a generic cake design for weddings, if the couple wanted to add say two grooms or such they could buy two sets of toppers.

Just as in the simular case the baker was willing to bake a cake, just wouldn't put the hateful message on it, but instead was willing to still provide them the means to put their own message on the cake.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As long as the customer lies, the baker will oblige?
Who said anything about lying? They were telling the truth. His sister and her fiance would have to come in and answer the baker's questions so that he could create the cake. That is how he does it.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Even if the baker knew it was going to be used for a wedding? I thought the whole point was that he was an active participant in anything his baked goods were used it, so I'm not sure that this approach would work.
It doesn't matter what they use it for, he did not participate in making a wedding cake. He made a generic cake.

Bread and wine = food for hunger, generic food
Bread and wine = Communion/Eucharist, sacrament

He doesn't use his artistic abilities to create cakes for Halloween events either, but if someone walked in a bought a generic cake off the shelf, they could certainly buy it and add Halloween themed whatever to it.
 
Upvote 0

Lily of Valleys

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2017
786
425
Australia
✟68,600.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But living in a black household is, which is why I brought it up as an example of an act which is based entirely on the identity of the person performing the act.
But having a belief that a black person should not live in a black household is essentially denying the person to live. In contrast, homosexuals do not have to get married or even have a wedding reception. In fact many homosexuals choose not to get married.

Kinda like the identity of the couple is the only think which determines which type of marriage is taking place. Weird you'd have to ignore that and talk about something else.
I have actually addressed that in my previous post. I said it is their identity only because they choose to identify themselves with the activity. Not everyone who experience same-sex attraction identify themselves with homosexual act though.

How does a homosexual couple choose to have a straight wedding?
I meant not all homosexual couples choose to get married. I didn't say they choose to have a straight wedding.

If he'd do that for any customer he wouldn't be in the legal trouble he is now.
He'd do that for any customer unless the artistic expression through what he creates would convey a message that violates his conscience. We'll wait and see how the supreme court will rule on whether applying Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel Phillips to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,478
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,465.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't get how this is a free speech issue when it more a free exercise of religion. This has set the case up for failure since whether or not this an exercise of Constitionally protected speech isn't a real question. The genie is out of the bottle, gay rights activists should be carefully what they ask for. This trend in Constitional law is dangerous and ripe for abuse. If the Supreme Court upholds the lower courts finding this will ruin this bakers life, the Colorado law reads like a criminal indictment. Religion is supposed to be protected from government, I personally think this is an assault on moral and religious convictions.

It's a civil, not a criminal law, in Colorado.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
It's a civil, not a criminal law, in Colorado.
Nonsense, civil law is a site for damages, usually with a property settlement or monetary penalty. The original law came with jail time, or and by the way, a civil rights violation carries a heavy federal penalty. Either this is a civil rights issue or it's not, the Supreme Court isn't and Ivy League social engineering tool.
 
Upvote 0