He Deny One To A Gay Couple By Adam Liptak: Article Analysis

1200 Words 5 Pages
Summary of “Cake is His ‘Art’, So Can He Deny One to a Gay Couple?”

The article “Cake is His ‘Art’, So Can He Deny One to a Gay Couple?”, written by Adam Liptak and published by The New York Times, introduces a problem between religious belief and the sex orientation. On July 2012, a gay couple, David Mullins and Charlie Craig, visited Masterpiece Cakes, located in Lakewood, Colorado, to order a cake for their upcoming wedding. A Christian baker, Jack Phillips, refused to make a wedding cake for the same-sex couple due to his religious belief. The problem faced in this case would be that they both have their First Amendment rights. The main controversy calls in the question of, finding a balance point between discrimination of sexual orientation
…show more content…
The Commission’s order affirmed previous determinations that Masterpiece’s refusal to sell Mullins and Craig a wedding cake constituted discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of Colorado law. The Commission also ordered Masterpiece Cakeshop to change its company policies, provide “comprehensive staff training” regarding public accommodations discrimination, and provide quarterly reports for the next two years regarding steps it has taken to come into compliance and whether it has turned away any prospective customers. The civil rights commission and a Colorado court rejected Phillips' argument that forcing him to create a cake violated his First Amendment rights of freedom of expression and exercise of religion. However, it was then brought up to the Supreme Court and they had made the decision to fight back even though the Supreme Court was bolstered by the addition of the staunch conservative. Currently, the case is still in the process with no ruling decision …show more content…
The decision of the Supreme Court will have a far-reaching impact on future cases. For the LGBT community, there are concerns that if the Supreme Court’s judgement sides with Mr. Phillips and makes the judgement that the bakery has the speech right protected, it would create legal discrimination based on a claim of religious beliefs (Roberts) which would “would amount to a broad mandate for discrimination” (Liptak). On the contrary, if the Supreme Court is in favor of the gay couple, then the discriminated people might have a better feeling of being protected by the law. Also, people in businesses, in fear of being accused, will pay more attention to their speeches and stop the inappropriate action of giving discrimination to their customers. In that way, the minority groups can be treated fairly and feel respected. However, it could cause problems against people with religious beliefs as it might affect them in a way that they are forced to work on something that they do not believe in. It also shows that their religious beliefs are less

Related Documents