Quantcast

Masterpiece Cakeshop refuses to bake a wedding cake for gay couple Fair or Foul?

★~DoctorWhoGuru~★ 2012/07/24 06:11:35
You!
Add Photos & Videos
28-year-old Dave Mullins and 31-year-old Charlie Craig stopped by Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop to order their wedding reception cake -- what they hoped would be a rainbow-layered masterpiece decked out in teal and red frosting (their ceremony colors). Although they'll be reciting their vows in Provincetown, Massachusetts, in September, the couple plans to celebrate with a reception for friends and family in Denver in October. But after bakery owner Jack Phillips listened to their request, they say, he refused it. His business doesn't create cakes for gay weddings.

Read More: http://blogs.westword.com/cafesociety/2012/07/masterpiece_cak...
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • ehrhornp 2012/07/24 08:08:56
    Foul
    ehrhornp
    +7
    Actually it is just stupid. The cake shop is suppose to be providing cakes and other sweets and not pass moral judgement on others. I am sure they can find another bakery which will make a cake with love, not hate.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • skroehr 2012/07/24 15:53:31
    Fair
    skroehr
    +1
    It's their own business, and I'm sure there are other cake shops run for either by or for gays, (or both), who would be more than happy to cooperate. These "so and so company" refuses to provide/perform for/allow "such and such" for gay persons statements, really all have the same answer. Gay persons aren't the only people alive endowed with freedom of choice. Business owners are as well.
  • MandaLynne 2012/07/24 15:50:44
    Fair
    MandaLynne
    +1
    Private businesses have the right to refuse service.
  • gocar MandaLynne 2012/07/24 16:08:35
    gocar
    +1
    THEY DO NOT. Not based on their bias against a certain part of the population.
  • MandaLynne gocar 2012/07/24 16:11:47
    MandaLynne
    +1
    Yes, they do, whether you like it or agree with or not.
  • MandaLynne gocar 2012/07/24 16:17:12
    MandaLynne
    +1
    A private business can refuse service or ban anyone they wish from the premises for any reason as long as isn't based upon a protected characteristic like gender, race, ethnic background or religion.

    The couple does not have a legal right to a wedding cake.
  • Sinister Ken Doll™ 2012/07/24 15:40:50
    Fair
    Sinister Ken Doll™
    +2
    while i think that is an incredibly stupid reason to not bake them a cake, business owners do have the right to refuse service to people

    i'm willing to bet that there are gonna be plenty of nicer, open minded bakeries in the area that would be more than happy to bake their cake. if i could bake, i know i would :)
  • captainquiggle 2012/07/24 15:21:26
    Fair
    captainquiggle
    +1
    Hey, they can refuse whatever business they want to. It's their right. They are also disgusting individuals for doing such and should go out of business for it.
  • lolitalovely 2012/07/24 15:20:16
    Fair
    lolitalovely
    +1
    It's their right. They take the loss of profit.
  • cmdrbnd007 2012/07/24 15:11:00
    Fair
    cmdrbnd007
    +2
    It's his business and if he doesn't want to then he doesn't have to. I would think that just because of that attitude the couple would want to take their business elsewhere.
  • baxter 2012/07/24 15:10:21
    Foul
    baxter
  • jackolantyrn356 2012/07/24 15:06:59
    Fair
    jackolantyrn356
    +1
    Their loss of a good profit.
  • Paige 2012/07/24 15:00:00
    Foul
    Paige
    +1
    Unfortunately he has every right to refused but its sad that people are so judgemental.
  • YepIDidItSo 2012/07/24 14:57:46
    Fair
    YepIDidItSo
    +2
    Not saying I agree but businesses have a right to refuse services to anyone they choose. Sorry.
  • Donald Eric Kesler 2012/07/24 14:45:21
    Foul
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +2
    Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop is not the sort of place I wish to support.
  • SoCalEx... Donald ... 2012/07/24 16:11:18
    SoCalEx-Dem
    Then buy your cakes else where.
  • Donald ... SoCalEx... 2012/07/24 17:06:15
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    That is what I will do. I will spend my money at those establishments that love freedom and equality.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/24 17:23:14 (edited)
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    Yet you allow your bias to drive you elsewhere?

    My rule is: I don't allow someone else to decide what I will do or think.
    They cannot offend me, because that would be letting them have their way with me.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/24 18:11:40
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    If being intolerant of ignorance and hate makes me biased, then you may consider me biased.

    No one else is making a choice on my behalf. I am choosing who I will and will not patronize. I have chosen to not patronize an establishment that promotes ignorance and hate.

    To be certain, Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop is free to continue their campaign against the rights of others, but they won't be doing it with my resources.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/24 19:24:53
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    You call it hate, but I did not see violence used.

    Is running a business by your own standards a "campaign against the rights of others"? I don't think so. It is a choice.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/24 19:58:06
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    Surely, you are not suggesting that hate and violence or synonymous. Hate can exist with violence. Likewise, violence can exist without hate.

    I will readily concede that the Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop has made a choice on how to run their business. I will even concede that they have the right to make this choice.

    Clearly, Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop consider baking secondary to promoting their anti-freedom agenda. I suspect that this will prove unprofitable.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/24 20:00:40
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    Hate is at least violent thought, which in time, will lead to violent action.

    I hate no one, and unless called upon to defend someone else's life or property, will perform no violence on another human being.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/25 15:27:13
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    Not everything is about you, Dave Sawyer. I am writing about the hateful ways of the Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop.

    However, since you support and agree with Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop's policy of anti-freedom and anti-equality, I suspect you are a hateful person, too. Why else would you go out of your way to oppose the liberties of others?

    Once again, you are attempting to twist my words to suit your argument, falsely claiming that all hate will ultimately lead to violence. This is simply not true. Not all hate leads to violence.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/25 15:34:19
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    So far there is no evidence for hate from the Cakeshop, merely for standing up for one's own beliefs.

    Hate in action is promoting others' actions against the Cakeshop because they stood for their convictions.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/25 16:54:01
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    The beliefs expressed by Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop are hateful. If you also think it is acceptable to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, then you, too, have a hate based system of belief.

    To be certain, the Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop stood for their convictions; however, their convictions are the convictions of those from the early age of iron. Hopefully, they will one day decide the rest of us in the modern world.

    You are correct in one regard. I do hate the policy makers at the Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop. I hate them because they are willfully ignorant and callously hateful. I hate them because they hypocritically consider themselves wise and compassionate.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/25 18:36:43
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    I discriminate on the basis of behavior not feelings.

    Is it wrong to assume that if they get married, they are going to have some sort of sex together?

    This Cakeshop is so big it has "policymakers"?

    So you, at least, admit to being a hater.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/25 19:30:54
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥ wrote, "I discriminate on the basis of behavior not feelings."

    You discriminate against homosexuals. The distinction you are attempting to make between those homosexuals who are sexually active and those who are not is irrelevant.

    What is relevant is that you irrationally support discrimination. You are an advocate of hate and ignorance.

    Do you seriously think that an organization must be a certain size to have policy makers? You would be wrong.

    Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop has a discriminatory policy of treating homosexual customers differently than their heterosexual customers. Someone decided that was the policy for this organization. This person was their policy maker.

    I have never denied my deep and abiding hate for those who are ignorant and hateful.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/25 19:46:27 (edited)
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    God doesn't tell us how to feel, He tells us how to behave.

    I do not advocate for hate or ignorance.
    It is God's love that drives me to seek the best for my neighbor (not necessarily what he wants, but "as you would have him do to you.")
    I abhor ignorance, especially ignorance of God and His word.

    I believe the discrimination was on what they would create as part of their business (which is an art), not of what they could do with each other.

    Now it's only one policy maker (that's more believable).

    If I submitted to your way of thinking, I would have to hate you back, but I don't.

    Why is it OK for you to "hate", but not those who disagree with you?
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/26 09:01:32
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/26 13:42:38
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    "Which of these divinities are you claiming is concerned with behavior and not feelings?"
    The Creator of the heaven and the earth, and the Father of our spirits.

    "By what authority do you claim to know the mind of this divinity?"
    By the authority of Jesus Christ who atoned for our sins.

    "It is hubristic of you to think otherwise."
    My confidence is not in myself but in Jesus Christ who gives me both knowledge and strength for the task.

    "But the natural man receiveth not
    the things of the Spirit of God:
    for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them,
    because they are spiritually discerned.
    But he that is spiritual judgeth all things,
    yet he himself is judged of no man.
    For who hath known the mind of the Lord,
    that he may instruct him?
    But we have the mind of Christ."
    - 1 Corinthians 2:14-16
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/27 15:07:50
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    The Gospel according to St. Matthew, Chapter 7


    1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

    2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

    The Gospel according to St. Luke, Chapter 6

    37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

    38 give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

    39 And he spake a parable unto them; Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? Mt. 15.14

    40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

    41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine ...

    The Gospel according to St. Matthew, Chapter 7


    1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

    2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

    The Gospel according to St. Luke, Chapter 6

    37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

    38 give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

    39 And he spake a parable unto them; Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? Mt. 15.14

    40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

    41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
    (more)
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/27 15:49:57 (edited)
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    Are you really trying to pit the New Testament against itself?
    Instead, you should learn to understand it.

    Did you miss the part where you quoted, " but every one that is perfect shall be as his master."?
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/27 18:04:19
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    The bible is filled with contradictions. For example, there are two separate and different accounts of the death of Judas. Likewise, the gospels can’t agree on the final words of Jesus Christ and who discovered the empty tomb.

    That is not the point I was attempting to make.

    I am pointing out that you are a hypocrite. You think of yourself as god, judging others for their sins. You don’t love god; you just love yourself.

    The Gospel according to St. John, Chapter 8.

    6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

    7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

    8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/27 18:44:01 (edited)
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    It is the evidence of honesty that different accounts do not agree in detail, as any two witnesses will not agree exactly on what they witnessed. No set of words would describe exactly what happened, so there will be differences, without meaning that any version is inaccurate, merely missing some of the details.

    I do not think of myself as god. I merely repeat what God has already said. If I were to say anything contrary, I would be setting myself up in the place of God. God sent His prophets and apostles, and me, to say "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand."

    In that same passage you quoted, Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." - John 8:11

    You are the hypocrite for not quoting the punch line.

    Jesus does not save us in our sinful condition, He saves us from our sinful condition.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/27 20:36:57
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    The inconsistencies and contradictions and outright falsehoods found in the biblical manuscripts point to a human and not a divine origin.

    For example, the Pericope Adulterae is not to be found in the earliest manuscripts. Most biblical scholars agree that it was added to the text sometime in the late fourth century. In other words, the whole story of the woman taken in adultery was added a few hundred years after the fact.

    This is the magic book upon which you are justifying a policy of hate and intolerance.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/27 23:03:45
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    It points to a human audience. We don't speak His language, He speaks ours.

    We do not have the original manuscripts to compare with.

    Not my fault that you quoted a passage that you yourself discredit.

    It is apparently the book you base your warm and fuzzy interpretation of God's will on, by hunting and pecking at it.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/07/31 14:54:19
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    Do you seriously wish to claim that your god is pretending to be imperfect in order to better communicate with humanity? So, how exactly does providing a faux cure for leprosy in Leviticus 14:2-52 allow god to converse with humanity?

    Numbers 5:11-31 outlines magical spell that will allow you test your wife to see if she is being adulterous. Just like the cure for leprosy, it does not work. Explain to me again how these lies and falsehoods serve as evidence for the Bible’s divine origin.

    You wrote, “We do not have the original manuscripts to compare with.”

    You are correct. We do not have any original biblical manuscripts. Each and every one of the Biblical manuscripts is nothing more than copies of earlier copies. Excluding some small fragments, no two biblical manuscripts agree with one another.

    One would think that if these texts were important to an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient entity, then the originals would have been preserved. Obviously, engraving the message on a stone tablet was beyond the powers of the divinity in question.

    You also wrote, “Not my fault that you quoted a passage that you yourself discredit.”

    None of the Biblical manuscripts are credible. In a U.S. court of law, an anonymously produced hand written copy of another hand written copy of a lost origin...







    Do you seriously wish to claim that your god is pretending to be imperfect in order to better communicate with humanity? So, how exactly does providing a faux cure for leprosy in Leviticus 14:2-52 allow god to converse with humanity?

    Numbers 5:11-31 outlines magical spell that will allow you test your wife to see if she is being adulterous. Just like the cure for leprosy, it does not work. Explain to me again how these lies and falsehoods serve as evidence for the Bible’s divine origin.

    You wrote, “We do not have the original manuscripts to compare with.”

    You are correct. We do not have any original biblical manuscripts. Each and every one of the Biblical manuscripts is nothing more than copies of earlier copies. Excluding some small fragments, no two biblical manuscripts agree with one another.

    One would think that if these texts were important to an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient entity, then the originals would have been preserved. Obviously, engraving the message on a stone tablet was beyond the powers of the divinity in question.

    You also wrote, “Not my fault that you quoted a passage that you yourself discredit.”

    None of the Biblical manuscripts are credible. In a U.S. court of law, an anonymously produced hand written copy of another hand written copy of a lost original would be thrown out as inadmissible.

    Furthermore, it is a text that is laden with demonstrably false supernatural claims; snakes do not talk, people can’t survive in the digestive tract of a fish and you can’t repopulate an endangered species with only a single surviving pair.

    You also wrote, “It is apparently the book you base your warm and fuzzy interpretation of God's will on, by hunting and pecking at it.”

    All Christians pick and choose. That is why there are over thirty thousand different denominations of the Christian faith. That is why you have Christians opposing equality for gays, but dining out at the Red Lobster. Leviticus describes both homosexuality and the eating of shellfish as abominations, but many Christians opt to only worry about one.

    In fact, on every issue you will find Christians on both sides. Some Christians support equality for gays, while others oppose it. Some Christians support restrictions on assault rifles, while others oppose it. Some Christians support a woman’s right to have an abortion, while others oppose it. In short, Christianity is a meaningless term.
    (more)
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/07/31 16:28:27
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    God does not pretend to be imperfect, but imperfect eyes cannot see His perfection.

    It is not a cure you refer to, faux or otherwise.
    "This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy, and scall, And for the leprosy of a garment, and of a house, And for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot: To teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean: this is the law of leprosy." - Leviticus 14:54-57

    It is not "a magical spell". And it would not work for you because of the loss of faith.

    God did write the ten commandments on stone tablets with his finger. After they were shown to the people, they were placed in the Ark of the Covenant where they could not be seen or worshiped because only the High Priest could go in to the place where they were kept. And now, the ark is somewhere we don't know.

    When I ate at the Red Lobster, I had whitefish. Not that I feel bound by the Old Covenant laws, but because, even in this day, it seems prudent not to eat bottom feeders.

    We are given our gift of free will so that we can choose between good and evil, truth and falsehood. What we choose makes us what we will be. I found my way to where I am by observing and comparing various teachings with what I had of God's Word - initially, all I had was the Bible.

    Some Old Testament laws were there fro...
    God does not pretend to be imperfect, but imperfect eyes cannot see His perfection.

    It is not a cure you refer to, faux or otherwise.
    "This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy, and scall, And for the leprosy of a garment, and of a house, And for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot: To teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean: this is the law of leprosy." - Leviticus 14:54-57

    It is not "a magical spell". And it would not work for you because of the loss of faith.

    God did write the ten commandments on stone tablets with his finger. After they were shown to the people, they were placed in the Ark of the Covenant where they could not be seen or worshiped because only the High Priest could go in to the place where they were kept. And now, the ark is somewhere we don't know.

    When I ate at the Red Lobster, I had whitefish. Not that I feel bound by the Old Covenant laws, but because, even in this day, it seems prudent not to eat bottom feeders.

    We are given our gift of free will so that we can choose between good and evil, truth and falsehood. What we choose makes us what we will be. I found my way to where I am by observing and comparing various teachings with what I had of God's Word - initially, all I had was the Bible.

    Some Old Testament laws were there from the beginning, such as the ten commandments, sexual norms, tithing, etc., though we have little to show us that. Adam's sons, and presumably Adam, are shown in the Bible to offer animal sacrifices (in similitude of Christ's giving His life for mankind), and therefore a priesthood was there before the Aaronic Priesthood given through Moses. There is more of God's word than the Bible, so we have more details than the Bible gives.
    (more)
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/08/01 04:23:50
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    If all that nonsense from Leviticus was a ceremonial ritual and not a cure for Leprosy, then it was an even bigger waste of time that I originally suspected.

    Numbers 5:11-31 absolutely outlines a magical spell that will allow you test your wife to see if she is being adulterous. The fact that you think it would work for those who have faith confirms that it is a magical spell.

    The Ten Commandments were not written by the finger of god on a stone tablet. They weren't even original. They were borrowed from existing Babylonian laws. They all appeared first in the Code of Hammurabi.

    Seriously, if the Ten Commandments were written in stone, why are their discrepancies between the commandments in Deuteronomy and the commandments in Exodus?

    At the end of the day, all you have is your faith.
  • Dave Sa... Donald ... 2012/08/01 04:50:23
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    If you understood it, it wouldn't be a waste of time.

    It's not magic. If anything, it's psychological.

    They did not all exist in the Code of Hammurabi. They were given to Adam anyway, so Hammurabi stole what he did from earlier people.

    At the end of the day, I hope you will find yours. You will need it.
  • Donald ... Dave Sa... 2012/08/01 13:18:14
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    All ten of the Ten Commandments may be found in the Code of Hammurabi. This is the earliest written legal system. It was in place well before the Old Testament manuscripts were written.

    There was no historical Adam. Regardless, there is nothing in the Book of Genesis to support your claim that God gave Adam the Code of Hammurabi.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/10/31 17:05:43

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals