He Said/ She Said: Should Businesses Be Able to Refuse Services for Gay Weddings?

He said…

By Bless Guillette, Contributor

 

This topic is complex. It is part of an ongoing bombardment of religious freedom in the United States. Although I do find that Jack Phillips, the baker who did not want to design and create a wedding cake for the gay couple, mishandled the situation, his actions came from a loving and religious position. His position is that if he were to bake a wedding cake for a queer couple, he would be actively upholding the ideology of homosexual marriage and discounting his own religious morality. His legal arguments are based on two parts of the first amendment: the free exercise clause, which protects his right to freely practice his faith, and the free speech clause, which protects him from being compelled to “speak” messages that he does not support.

 

From a secular liberal perspective, Mr. Phillips’ beliefs are considered foolish because liberals tend to view homosexuality as a natural human disposition. This is a valid opinion; however, it is still an opinion. In truth, this topic is dependent upon how one has been raised to view homosexuality. Some Biblical perspectives perceive homosexuality as a sin, but this does not mean that gay people are any less human or evil.

 

In the case of Jack Phillips, the Colorado law—the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA)—which Jack allegedly violated, has a double standard regarding discrimination against religious beliefs. This was portrayed in the instance where William Jack, a Christian Fundamentalist, requested two cakes sculpted in the shape of the Bible with scriptures regarding the Biblical view of homosexuality. Azúcar, the bakery in this case, rejected to furnish the cakes with the respective verses on the basis that they were glorifying offensive material, similar to Phillips obliging to sell other goods to the gay couple but not to design a custom  wedding cake. When William filed a case against the bakery, the commission threw out the case immediately. Then, the Colorado Court of Appeals proceeded to rationalize the commission’s decision. This incident makes evident the ongoing discrimination against Christian beliefs by an unjust application of anti-discrimination laws. Religious free speech is constantly under fire by increasingly secularized state governments.

In conclusion, Phillips finds that gay marriage disregards the fundamental idea of marriage due to his own religious beliefs. Hence, obliging to making a gay wedding cake would go against his religion. There is an obvious double standard when religious freedom is pitted against anti-discrimination, making this an unfair interpretation of anti-discrimination.

 

She said…

By Claira Schiffrik, Contributor

This question is complicated as both sides claim that the Constitution supports their positions. For the gay couple denied service for their wedding, the First Amendment stands for their right of freedom of expression without discrimination. For the baker, the argument is that the First Amendment stands for his right to religious freedom. Under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (which prohibits businesses that are open to the public from discriminating against customers based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation), the baker legally did not have the right to refuse to serve the couple. Does this law infringe on the baker’s First Amendment rights? Absolutely not. The First Amendment allows people to have the freedom of religion, but it does not allow people to spew discrimination or hate on the grounds of religious expression.

 

Some congregations believe that women are inferior to men, black people are inferior to white people, or Jews are inferior to Christians. I would ask those who defend the baker’s right to express his religion if they believe that women, black people, or Jews should be subjected to legal discrimination. Their answer will (hopefully) be no. If the baker were given the right to deny service to gay weddings because of his faith, who’s to say that anyone else who attempts to discriminate on the grounds of religious expression would not have the right to do so?

 

We as a country have decided that discrimination is unacceptable. Why should a bakery be any different? If you open a business to the public, you can’t just pick and chose which members of the public you will serve. The government is not forcing the baker to bake a cake. It’s requiring the baker—who by choice opened a public bakery—to treat all Americans with equal respect and courtesy. By getting married, the couple is doing no more than expressing who they are and their love for each other, and they should under no circumstances be discriminated against because of that. Every American citizen deserves to know that they have the right to go into a public business and not be discriminated against.

 

Featured Image via Getty Images