Today, in one of its most shocking rulings, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that all same-sex couples residing in Colorado must purchase a cake from a Christian baker with icing that reads “The only valid marriage is one that occurs between a man and a woman.” Of course, this isn’t what actually occurred in the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In actuality, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Masterpiece Cakeshop, stating that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had acted in an (ironically) biased manner.
BREAKING: Supreme Court rules narrowly for Colorado baker who wouldn't make same-sex wedding cake.
— The Associated Press (@AP) June 4, 2018
“The Commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,” said Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Despite what some are dishonestly claiming, the Supreme Court’s ruling does not “allow” businesses to discriminate against homosexuals by refusing to serve them as a whole. Rather, Justice Kennedy stated, “The reason and motive for the baker’s refusal was based on his sincere religious beliefs and convictions. The Court’s precedents make clear that the baker, in his capacity as the owner of the business serving the public, might have his rights to the free exercise of religion limited by generally applicable laws. Still, the delicate question of when the free exercise of his religion must yield to an otherwise valid exercise of state power needed to be determined in an adjudication in which the religious hostility on the part of the State itself would not be a factor in the balance the State sought to reach.”
https://twitter.com/DanielCMattson/status/1003652585583267840
Despite the clear language of the Court’s ruling, some have been trying to compare today’s decision with the segregated lunch counters before the Civil Rights movement. Even the ACLU was quick to point out that the Court did not rule that the Constitution gives a right to discriminate. SCOTUS did not rule that Masterpiece Cakeshop had the right to refuse service to a same-sex couple, but that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not give the business a fair hearing. The First Amendment and equal rights aspects of the case remain unresolved.
Notwithstanding some major portions of the case being unresolved, in affirming that the law must be fairly applied to all, in a manner neutral toward religion, SCOTUS has still managed to rule in favor of civil rights. For those still seeking to compare this decision to segregated lunch counters, I have a pretty simple question for you: how is freedom of association comparable to laws that enforced the separation of people based solely on skin color? I’ll wait for you to string together some logical fallacies in order to try and explain this.
Regarding today’s decision, Justice Clarence Thomas noted that it is “Hard to see how Phillips’ statement is worse than the racist, demeaning, and threatening speech towards blacks that this Court has tolerated in previous decisions.” Justice Thomas was referring to how the case all started when Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, told a gay couple he would “Make your birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies. I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.” Justice Thomas stated that it is “hard to see how this statement stigmatizes gays and lesbians more than…subjecting them to signs that say ‘God Hates Fags’…which this Court has deemed protected by the First Amendment.”
You can hate the Masterpiece Cakeshop for their beliefs, the same way I despise neo-Nazis for spewing their hateful ideology at a rally; you can also despise a message while defending an individual’s right to it in a free society. Freedom of Speech protects the speaker, not the listener; Freedom of Speech also means you can remain silent, nobody can compel you to repeat their talking points or even affirm their message.
