Did the Supreme Court Fall for a Stunt?

Jun 7, 2018

By Stephanie Mencimer

In its decision this week in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the Supreme Court wanted a way to rule narrowly in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple, without upsetting decades of civil rights law. It seems to have found the answer to its conundrum in a stunt pulled by a religious-right activist. The effectiveness of the stunt, and its embrace by the court’s conservative justices, illustrates the extent to which Christian legal organizations are influencing the law, all the way to the Supreme Court.

In 2014, a man named William Jack paid a visit to Azucar Bakery in Denver. There, Jack demanded two cakes, both in the shape of an open Bible. On one, he wanted “Homosexuality is a detestable sin – Leviticus 18:22” written on one side of the Bible and “God hates sin Psalm 45:7” on the other. On the second cake, he asked the bakery to inscribe “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8” and to include an iced illustration of two men holding hands in front of a cross, covered with what Jack described as a “Ghostbusters symbol,” a red circle with a line through it to indicate that such unions are “un-Biblical.”

The bakery’s owner, Marjorie Silva, told Jack she’d sell him the Bible cakes but wouldn’t write the words on them. She offered to sell him a decorating bag, tip, and icing so he could put the message on himself. Jack returned two more times that day, at one point asking if she’d conferred with a lawyer, but she continued to refuse to sell him the cakes he wanted. When he left for the last time, he told her, “You will hear from me!” Silva told Out Front magazine.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

4 comments on “Did the Supreme Court Fall for a Stunt?

  • @OP – The effectiveness of the stunt, and its embrace by the court’s conservative justices, illustrates the extent to which Christian legal organizations are influencing the law, all the way to the Supreme Court.

    The “stunt” is the appointment of biased faith-thinking judges, who will not rationally apply the law as it is written!

    Looking at this other thread:-

    Most Americans do not support businesses citing religion to deny service to LGBT people.

    it would seem the answer is in campaigns for the majority of Americans to boycott business bigots who discriminate against their fellow citizens!



    Report abuse

  • Would it not be equally a “stunt”, where the opposite were true where a-theists organizations of belief did the same? Yes, it would. So, then the same criticism would be at hand – the inability to rationally apply the law
    because of their belief biases. So where do you go when you judge on rationality? Your argument cuts both ways and appears to be very emotional, not rational of much. Your argument as to majority of Americans not supporting such, then, shouldn’t the opposite be applied when minority parties of belief try to impose their desires upon the majority would equal discrimination against their fellow citizens….so Hitler was right in the end…the majority held his beliefs. I would recommend to think more clearly than this emotional ploy under the guise of thoughtfulness in order to stir up those who only think your way., Not very persuasive or engaging.



    Report abuse

  • Steve #2
    Jun 7, 2018 at 2:15 pm

    Would it not be equally a “stunt”, where the opposite were true where a-theists organizations of belief did the same?

    This assumes that atheists would make decisions on the basis of biased preconceptions rather than rational interpretation of laws based on medical evidence.

    There is no reason to believe atheists of humanists would discriminate against people of particular religions! This tribalistic dichotomy of “my religion” and to be disparaged “outsiders”, is specific to particular religions and sects.

    Yes, it would. So, then the same criticism would be at hand – the inability to rationally apply the law because of their belief biases.

    The point of promoting rationality and science, is that views are NOT based on preconceived “beliefs”, but are established by applying logical thinking to scientific evidence.

    There is a massive difference between the validity of views based on scientific evidence, and whimsical dogmas picked from ancient mythology!

    All views are NOT equally valid! Some are simply unsupported by evidence, flawed, and wrong!



    Report abuse

  • Steve #2
    Jun 7, 2018 at 2:15 pm

    So let’s expand a little on the medical science behind fair and equal treatment for people who do not fit the traditional dichotomous preconception of male or female!

    Would it not be equally a “stunt”, where the opposite were true where a-theists organizations of belief did the same? Yes, it would.

    The process of thinking rationally from scientific observation based evidence, is an entirely different process to blind faith belief in some preached dogma or preconception!

    So, then the same criticism would be at hand – the inability to rationally apply the law because of their belief biases.

    So this claim is a false dichotomy which claims the different thought processes are the same.

    So where do you go when you judge on rationality?

    Rational views are built by logically building on observations of verifiable testable evidence.

    Your argument cuts both ways and appears to be very emotional, not rational of much.

    This is what is know as “psychological projection” – attributing a person’s own flaws to opponents’ arguments.

    Understanding transgender medical conditions and homo-sexuality, is a rational objective process, – although separately, bigoted abuses of minority groups of citizens, is likely to generate emotional reactions to the injustices!

    There were earlier discussions which covered these topics going into detail.

    https://www.richarddawkins.net/2017/06/montana-initiative-would-limit-transgender-use-of-bathrooms/#li-comment-223017

    https://www.richarddawkins.net/2017/11/va-republican-trans-people-violate-the-laws-of-nature-at-a-fundamental-level/#li-comment-227786



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.