# Colorado baker sued again **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 16, 2018, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732 "2018-08-16T14:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/181 "2018-08-31T17:34:45Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Baking cakes goes against the baker’s conscience? Yes. Baking cakes that celebrate gay marriage goes against the bakers conscience. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/182 "2018-08-31T17:43:50Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If you want to change the Senate’s role in getting Justices onto the Supreme Court, you are going to have to amend the Constitution. They weren’t betting anyone’s money - their role is to advise the President on nominees, and either give or withhold their consent. That’s what they did. > They didn’t do anything of the sort. Obama did nominate Garland - the Senate did not prevent this. The Senate advised Obama that they were not going to consent to that appointment. Just like the Constitution says. > True. They will anyway, but it’s still true. The GOP will have no right to complain then, just like the Democrats have no right to complain now. > > Fortunately Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are relatively young, although Notorious RBG will cling to her seat like grim death. We shall see who is sitting in the Oval Office, and who controls the Senate, when next the Supremes are looking for a back up singer. > > Regards, > Shodan When you depart from well established prior practice, OF COURSE the other side has cause to complain. By your rationale, the next Democratic president with a Democratic senate could pack the court with 10 MORE liberal justices because there is no constitution prohibition against it and the Republicans would have no right to complain. And this time the Democratic senators might go along with it. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/183 "2018-08-31T17:44:10Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Yes. Baking cakes that celebrate gay marriage goes against the bakers conscience. And I agree that nobody should be forcing him to bake cakes for people he doesn’t like. No baker should be chained to a counter and forced to bake. Fortunately they have an alternative - they can stop baking cakes for money, and find a career which doesn’t temp them to break the law. I also promote this type of solution for people who are generally good workers but if set to manning a register can’t resist dipping into the till. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/184 "2018-08-31T17:50:08Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > That would suck, but that is not what is happening here. > > What is happening here is that the government is requiring business open to the public to not discriminate against people for being a member of a protected class. > > If they were racist, rather than homophobic, and disapproved of miscegenation, would you have the same objection that the government is forcing them to participate in a religious ceremony that they didn’t agree with? No of course not. Race is a federally protected class. Sexual orientation is not. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/185 "2018-08-31T17:52:02Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > No of course not. Race is a federally protected class. Sexual orientation is not. Your mileage on that statement may vary by region - there are more protections than federal, and more localized protections still count. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/186 "2018-08-31T17:57:11Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > “Baker” is a choice, not an immutable condition. > > Ultimately, the government isn’t forcing any individual to bake a cake. What they are doing, is demanding that anyone who wants to be in the cake making business follow a set of standards, one of which is non-discrimination. Other standards include things like storing food safely and using wholesome ingredients. The law doesn’t usually consider a person’s occupation a “choice” in the same way that you mean here. How a person earns their livelihood is not some frilovous caprice. Telling them they either “do it in a way that violates their conscience or they don’t do it at all” is unconstitutional unless the thing we are telling them to do is itself more important than the guarantees of freedom of conscience. I don’t know how food safety standards could violate a person’s conscience but I suspect that a law that prevented mass food poisoning would pass this test and a law that said that all food must include bacon would not. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/187 "2018-08-31T17:58:49Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > And I agree that nobody should be forcing him to bake cakes for people he doesn’t like. No baker should be chained to a counter and forced to bake. > > Fortunately they have an alternative - they can stop baking cakes for money, and find a career which doesn’t temp them to break the law. I also promote this type of solution for people who are generally good workers but if set to manning a register can’t resist dipping into the till. Could we similarly force doctors to perform elective abortions if they perform dilation and extractions for miscarriages? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/188 "2018-08-31T17:59:57Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Your mileage on that statement may vary by region - there are more protections than federal, and more localized protections still count. Not if they run afoul of constitutional rights. Then they hardly count at all. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/189 "2018-08-31T18:01:35Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Could we similarly force doctors to perform elective abortions if they perform dilation and extractions for miscarriages? No. We can, however, expect them to perform D&Cs for lesbians if they do so for straight women. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/190 "2018-08-31T18:08:17Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Not if they run afoul of constitutional rights. Then they hardly count at all. Are you suggesting that making protected classes at the state level is unconstitutional? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/191 "2018-08-31T18:10:40Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The law doesn’t usually consider a person’s occupation a “choice” in the same way that you mean here. How a person earns their livelihood is not some frilovous caprice. Telling them they either “do it in a way that violates their conscience or they don’t do it at all” is unconstitutional unless the thing we are telling them to do is itself more important than the guarantees of freedom of conscience. Since when? I’ve literally never heard this. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/192 "2018-08-31T18:20:23Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Telling them they either “do it in a way that violates their conscience or they don’t do it at all” is unconstitutional unless the thing we are telling them to do is itself more important than the guarantees of freedom of conscience. Thanks for finally coming around. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/193 "2018-08-31T18:29:21Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Since when? I’ve literally never heard this. Public accommodations laws. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/194 "2018-08-31T18:40:25Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Public accommodations laws. Please clarify what you mean. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/195 "2018-08-31T18:45:46Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > It was a gamble the GOP should not have been allowed to take. Allowed? Allowed by whom? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/196 "2018-08-31T18:47:48Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Are you suggesting that making protected classes at the state level is unconstitutional? Not if you claim that your god hates that protected class, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/197 "2018-08-31T18:49:32Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > It was a gamble the GOP should not have been allowed to take. They were betting with someone else’s money. In this vision of yours, who does the “allowing?” ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/198 "2018-08-31T19:55:32Z")
> [@andros](#): > > No. We can, however, expect them to perform D&Cs for lesbians if they do so for straight women. I don’t see how that would violate anyone’s religious beliefs. Lets assume that the procedure for a D&C is exactly the same as an abortion, why would the doctor be able to object to the abortion? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/199 "2018-08-31T19:58:15Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Are you suggesting that making protected classes at the state level is unconstitutional? No I’m saying that state restrictions are meaningless in the face of constitutional rights. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2018, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732/200 "2018-08-31T20:00:24Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Thanks for finally coming around. The primacy of gay rights over religious freedom has yet to be established. SCOTUS may or may not elevate LGBTQ to a protected class (I suspect that they will do in my lifetime). But for right now, Colorado’s antipathy to religious rights makes this a bad place to try to bring these cases. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorado-baker-sued-again/819732.md?page=11)