Is Refusal to Write Anti-Gay Cake Message a Violation of Religious Freedom?
http://religiondispatches.org/is-refusal-to-write-anti-gay-cake-message-a-violation-of-religious-freedom/BY KARA LOEWENTHEIL
JANUARY 23, 2015
Denver, Colorado can feel like an alternate universe for a lot of reasons, but now we can add a new one to the list. Because in the first such case of which I’m aware, a bakery in Denver has been sued for refusing to bake a homophobic cake. According to the reports, the plaintiff in the suit requested that the baker bake him a cake that said “God hates gays” along with a picture of two men holding hands with an X over them. When the baker—who identifies as Christian herself—refused, the plaintiff filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division, accusing her of religious discrimination.
It’s a snappy inversion of the now-classic example of bakers who refuse to provide wedding cakes for gay marriage or commitment ceremonies (or florists who refuse to provide flowers, photographers who refuse to photograph the ceremony, etc.). And that’s probably not an accident; if I were a betting woman, I’d bet heavily that a pro-religious-exemption think tank or law firm, like the Becket Fund, had come up with this plan and recruited a plaintiff to set it in motion.
The involvement of the local politicians mentioned in the story is likely strategic as well: Talking Points Memo quotes an “anti-gay” state lawmaker who says he supports the baker’s right to not print messages she finds offensive on her cakes. Now perhaps he’s just a stringent supporter of free speech, but it’s entirely possible that he supports this principle because he knows it’s more likely to come up the other way around, with religious conservatives refusing to provide goods or services associated with practices to which they object (like gay marriage, abortion, contraception, etc.).
So as a piece of political theater and strategy, it’s a clever move. As a legal matter, it’s also an interesting case. The fact that the plaintiff requested actual words on the cake makes it more complicated, because it implicates the baker’s free speech rights. It’s one thing to request that a baker furnish a cake that might be used to celebrate something to which the baker objects—that’s a kind of second-degree complicity argument. But requiring a baker to actually perform a speech act—writing on the cake and selling it—might be more problematic from a free speech point of view.
more at link
= new reply since forum marked as read
I know what my ideological position is, but I am concerned about hypocrisy.
This author also brings up the point about the right to refuse something based on religious beliefs as opposed to political beliefs. The first may be protected while the second probably is not.
Now if we get into extreme groups, like the KKK, if what they would be doing is illegal, like a cross burning with cupcakes, I could see them being refused. Though why someone would make an announcement when buying a plain cake, I don't know.
But who the customer is should have no bearing on it. Rights are not up to the individual.
They should tell them their money is going to the NAACP or rev. Sharpton though. 
If you are open to business for the public, you must serve the whole public. Though you are allowed to refuse an unreasonable request that is different than what you normally do. Putting to names on a cake would be normal, even if they are both men or woman, saying something vile would not be.
Until both parties agree on a contracted arrangement, neither one is obligated to the other to fulfill any portion thereof.
Let's put this into my field for a moment. If the parents of a young gay man come to my office for a first family session and ask me to do some sort of conversion therapy on their son, am I obligated to do so?
Hell no. If they have paid, I refund their money and send them on their way. If we have not yet exchanged money, then I simply say no and ask them to leave my office. They can't sue me for either.
This guy can not sue a baker for not making a cake the way he wants. Did he pay for it and then only later ask for the bigoted message? Tough shit! That wasn't in the original terms. Did he simply walk in off the street and say I wanted a bigot cake with hate speech penned on it raspberry icing? Touch shit! The owner/baker can say, nope, I won't do it. Feel free to take your business elsewhere.
This is not a complicated situation. This man is an ass and has no legal, ethical, or moral standing whatsoever in this situation. I am only thankful that the baker is getting free advertising. Even bad publicity is publicity. They'll be just fine!
"
7) Public accommodation
The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce—
...snip...
(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment; "
A public accommodation cannot deny service. Arguably a therapist or medical professional cannot deny service either (although not covered by statute). However, the extent of the service is a matter of contractual agreement. The baker is obliged to provide a cake, but the decorations are a matter of agreement. Likewise, the therapist must provide counseling, but the form of the counseling is subject to agreement.
