A follow-up to the preceding Charlie Hebdo post, with a different approach: having one’s cake and eating it, too.
If a baker is required by law to make a wedding cake promoting same-sex marriage, should that same baker be required by law to make a cake with an anti-gay message?
That is essentially the case a court in Denver, Colorado, may have to consider (if it gets that far). Reports the Daily Mail, among others: “An anti-gay activist has filed a religious discrimination complaint against a bakery that refused to decorate a Bible-shaped cake with words describing homosexuals as ‘detestable’. … (The bakery) also refused the elderly man’s request for a design featuring two men holding hands with an ‘X’ over them, followed by the words ‘god hates homosexuality’.”
This is obviously a test case, in response to court decisions in the United States and the United Kingdom forcing bakeries to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples despite the anti-gay religious beliefs of the bakers.
So, where do we draw the line on free speech? Does the anti-gay activist have a case? Should the baker have to make him an anti-gay cake? Does the anti-gay person have a right to offend gay people, and to promote anti-gay sentiment with a cake?
After reading the responses to the preceding Charlie Hebdo post, I suspect many would side with the anti-gay activist on principle, i.e. free speech.
But if you did side with Charlie Hebdo and don’t side with the anti-gay activist, I would be curious to hear why Charlie Hebdo should be allowed to promote what millions consider to be anti-Muslim views while an anti-gay activist should not be allowed to express his views.
For discussion . . .
Personally, I don’t have an opinion about the Colorado case yet. I am still thinking about it.
What say you?