Here are the notes I took from class:
Tonight’s topic of discussion is about “the cake”. Today in the United States Supreme Court, they reviewed the case about a baker refusing to make a cake for a same-sex couple. One of the main questions asked was whether or not the cake was (in a sense) a form of speech. Did the baker have the right to refuse? Should same-sex couples consider this discrimination and fight it? After reading the many articles about this, it is hard for me to come to a solid opinion. I believe that the First Amendment does protect the baker, but I also believe that the baker is personally discriminating against the couple just based on sexual orientation. I am completely against racial discrimination, but with the many sexual orientations in today’s society, it is important for us as a nation to decide the protections and rights of those people. Even at a university level, many students and faculty now put their pronouns on their business cards, name badges, emails, etc. It is so interesting how blown up this case has become; I hope that this case sets a path for other sexual orientation and First Amendment cases in the future.
Here is a list of articles I viewed:
After taking time outside of class to ponder the case, I have decided that I would have ruled the cake baker guilty of discrimination. Yes, it is his shop and some would say that this violates his First Amendment right, but that right shouldn’t go as far as denying customers a service because of their sexual orientation. If the Supreme Court allows the baker to deny services, who is to say that more and more business owners wouldn’t do the same? In this case, it was same-sex couples being discriminated, but it could go way beyond that in the world we live in today (e.g.- race and religion). People haven’t been standing up against this discrimination just because of a cake, but rather the idea of simple service not being given to them because of who they marry. To me, this seems crazy. In my opinion, the baker can bake a cake for the couple without believing in what they practice and do. I see no harm to the baker in this case other than that it goes against his religion. I am also religious, but would never discriminate against someone’s sexual orientation just because of what I believe. Now, if the couple was violent or completely out of line, the defense of the baker would be different.
Journalism & Law 