Its the same baker from a few years ago.
targetted harrassment.
Colorado Supreme Court to hear case against Christian baker who refused to make LGBTQ-themed cake
Submitted 1 year ago by Blamemeta@lemm.ee to conservative@lemmy.world
Comments
Smilinguido@lemm.ee 1 year ago
tallwookie@lemm.ee 1 year ago
why couldnt the “victim” just bake their own cake? frivolous lawsuits like this just waste the Supreme Court’s time.
PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Would you be saying this if the person was denied service because they were black?
sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Interesting article. The twist this time is that the complainant only asked the baker to make a pink and blue cake. There is no mention of any words or overt imagery, as in previous cases. The baker refused to make the cake after being told by the complainant that the cake was intended to celebrate a gender transition.
While the complainant was definitely trolling the baker, I think she has a good chance of winning since the requested cake didn’t involve any speech. The same cake made for a kids’ birthday party would presumably have been okay. It is a brilliant move to out the bigot, and I hope it eventually ends up before SCOTUS.
Gigan@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If it goes to SCOTUS they’ll probably side with the baker.
quindraco@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Reminder that siding with the plaintiff is siding with slavery, which is defined as forced labor. We’ve already lost the thread when we ask questions like “Is the cake speech?”. Unless we want to actively support slavery, we have to let people refuse to work for other people, without purity tests on said refusal.
Blamemeta@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Theres an argument that since he was told what it was for, and its still custom, therefore its still speech.
Im not lawyery enough to make that argument, but his lawyer seems to think so.
In any case, the Elegant Bakery is .2 miles away, so theres an argument for targetted harrassment.