Colorado baker sued again, this time for "gender transition cake"

submitted by WrongToy from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

For me it wasn' t really about respecting his religion, it was all about artistic and speech freedom: bakery is not just cooking, a wedding cake requires artistic skills, and if the creator didn' t want to use his skills for this specific message and celebration, it was absolutely his right to refuse doing it. Not to mention eventual writing on the cake itself that would have been, for all intents, a person being paid and forced to say/write something he didn' t want to say.

It' s like if I were a singer, an organization contacts my agency to hire me for singing their "we are awesome" anthem and I refuse because I oppose what that organization stands for.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, I think it was all these issues at once.

But in the scenario you raise, I think the issue would not be whether individual singers represented by the agency refuse to take a gig on grounds of artistic license and freedom of expression. The issue would be whether the agency says from the get-go that no, since we the agency don't agree with the message/meaning of the song, we won't ask any of our artists to consider singing it.

In the Masterpiece Bake Shop cases, the guy being sued is both the owner of a retail business - the bake shop - and the artist who creates what the retail business sells. That's very different to being an independent artist who relies on an agency for bookings. And it's very different to being an agency that serves as an intermediary between independent creators and artists and those who want to hire artists and creators for particular gigs/tasks.

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Take out the agency then: I am a singer who is contacted by an organization and I refuse.

Point is, the art in question, be it singing/writing songs or baking a cake, is supposed to deliver a message. If I am against delivering that message, for whatever reason, forcing me to do it or making me pay for refusing to do it is a much serious thing that a gay couple having to find another baker or an organization having to find another singer.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree that one of the issues in the Masterpiece case is compelled speech and artistic expression. But they went after this guy coz he has a retail store that's open to all the public and is therefore subject to anti-discrimination laws that say it must serve all the public on equal terms.

Independent contractors and freelancers can turn down any job they want for any reason, and without being obliged to say what the reason is.