A Wedding Cake For Fido & Fluffy But Not For Dave & Charlie?

Imagine being told that the love between you and your partner is less legitimate than a dog wedding. Or having your commitment to one another compared to pedophilia.

Stephanie Schmalz and her partner, Jeanine, wanted to order some cupcakes to celebrate their commitment ceremony. They contacted Masterpiece Cake Shop in Lakewood, Colorado, but the store refused to take their order, informing the couple that they have a strict policy against selling cakes for same-sex weddings and ceremonies.

Then Stephanie tried a little experiment. She called the bakery and told the owner, Jack Phillips, that she was planning to host a wedding celebration for two dogs. She told him that the dog wedding cake would need to feed 20 people and should be decorated with the names "Roscoe" and "Buffy." Without hesitation, Phillips quoted her a price and asked how soon she needed it.

When another couple tried to place an order with Phillips, he told them he would not provide a cake for same-sex weddings, the same way he would not provide cakes for pedophiles.

Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig visited Masterpiece Cakeshop with Charlie's mom to sample wedding cakes, but they, too, were turned away. They decided to call Masterpiece out on its discriminatory policy. After consulting with the ACLU of Colorado and ACLU LGBT Project, they filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division (CCRD), charging the bakery with violating Colorado law, which prohibits retail businesses from discriminating based on sexual orientation. The subsequent CCRD investigation turned up abundant evidence supporting the couple's claim, including an admission from owner Jack Phillips that it is store policy to refuse service to gay couples for weddings or commitment ceremonies.

The CCRD officially concluded that Masterpiece Cakeshop broke the law by discriminating against Charlie and Dave, which prompted the Attorney General's office to file a formal complaint against the bakery this week, an action that will force the owners to explain themselves at a hearing in the fall.

The Masterpiece owners have claimed their policy is based on their "reading of the Word of God." But their business is not a house of worship. Colorado law allows members of the clergy to decide whom they will join in a marriage or civil union – and that's consistent with the principles of religious liberty our nation was founded on. While bakery owners are free to practice their faith and to personally oppose same-sex marriage, they cannot use those beliefs as an excuse to disrespect and discriminate against customers. The store has no more right to turn away a gay couple than to turn away an interracial couple, no matter what the owners' personal beliefs.

Masterpiece Cakeshop has willfully and repeatedly considered itself above the law when it comes to discriminating against customers. We look forward to helping Dave and Charlie prove otherwise at the upcoming hearing.

Learn more about LGBT rights, cakes, and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alertsfollow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.

View comments (17)
Read the Terms of Use

Anonymous

Science has proven--REPEATEDLY--that homosexuality is biologically driven and is NOT a choice, despite what Old-Testament-thumpers would have people believe. I believe Dave and Charlie did the right thing--they exposed the bakery's policies for what they were: discriminatory. Extreme right-wing Christians aren't the only ones who have discriminated against homosexuality. Sad to say but ultra-conservative Muslims are guilty of the same flawed thinking, which isn't really thinking at all, but a belief in an idea that doesn't make logical or compassionate sense. So even if the baker had a been a conservative Muslim, his practices would still be discriminatory, according to the law.

Anonymous

Wow. The right wing extremists on here are upset that they aren't permitted to openly hate people....really? News flash folks: If you hate in the name of god it is still hate. Hate is not a family value, nor is it a christian value. You're not fooling anyone by using god, or christian principles, as a reason to be permitted to hate and discriminate against people. Your hatred is protected in your house of worship if you believe religion is about hate and discrimination, but a bakery is not a church. If your business is serving the public then you are expected to serve all the public. If you are unwilling to do this then don't open a business that is open to the public. The business owner has a right to open a business that serves members only - then he can cater to those who have hate in their hearts the same as he does. The government did not force this man to open a public business - that was his choice. So the "slave labor" ridiculousness is just a right wing extremist desparately reaching for a reason to be permitted to discriminate.

Citing books by other hateful extremists doesn't mean you are somehow right in your hate, it just indicates how widespread extremist hate in America is. This silliness about finding another baker and that these victims need to "grow up" is just that - silliness. The victims are not required to find another baker. Period. The baker is required to follow a law for a business that serves the public. Just because the baker has hate in his heart doesn't mean that he gets to act on it in public - and his business is in public.

P.S. To the person who asked whether Colorado should be sued because the constitution defines marriage as between one man and one woman - the answer is yes. Just because the majority of people in a state are discriminatory and vote for a discriminatory constitutional amendment doesn't mean that amendment is defensible. This will be shown when the Supreme Court of the United States strikes down all bans against gay marriage in this country - it is only a matter of time before that occurs.

Anonymous

"Ruin everybody's life?"
Gimme a break with the drama king sh*t. How does it "ruin" someone's life to make a cake for someone who comes to pick it up, PAYS for it and then disappears out of your life possibly forever?

And what happens when EVERY business decides to do it that way, b/c they think a united front is going to force things THEIR way? Then what do they do? Take their business to Fluffy and Fido?

I'm NOT gay, I don't care who IS gay and I'm sick of whiners, which is the only thing these "people" sound like to me.

FTR I'm actually uncomfortable watching gay movies so I don't buy them, but I also don't tell people "I'm going to stop doing business with you if you sell gay/lesbian videos in this store.

Virginia resident

Will the ACLU offer to vigorously defend the 1st amendment rights of the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop against harassment by the rude lesbian of the gay lobby? It’s obvious that this biz was deliberately chosen for harassment for its insistence on defending its OWN rights.

It’s odd how the gay lobby insists on equal rights when their real goal is to eliminate from operating a business anyone who has 1st amendment rights they disapprove of. Where is the vindictiveness of the gay lobby coming from? Certain elements in Colorado in the gay lobby are behaving like Nazis treated Jews in the 1930s…

As of Jan. 2013, eight of the 12 comments here are "anonymous" and contain bullying, disrespectful name-calling, including Mr. Singleton’s. The open vindictiveness toward, and the additional BAITING of, a Lakewood cakeshop by the “dog wedding” ploy pursued by the lesbian, is beyond the pale.

YP.com lists 314 bakeries in or near Lakewood, CO, so this case ISN’T about buying a wedding cake, it's about destroying the first amendment rights of the owners of Masterpiece Cakeshop.

Colorado has a history of this type of agitation, dating back to 1993, when the targets were Celestial Seasonings Tea company of Boulder, Coors beer, Holly sugar, and Manfort meats. See http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/14/weekinreview/the-politics-of-dealing-with-the-threat-of-boycott.html

The book list offered by Mr. Singleton is not extremist, but the gay lobby policies exposed by these books are extremist. The research in these books present further evidence of the extremist approaches of said gay lobby, which will not rest until everybody is just like them: either gay, bisexual, or some other extreme such as “questioning” or “asexual”.

Not widely known: the American Psychological Association dropped homosexuality as an disorder from the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, only after its meetings were repeatedly disrupted by gay agitators.

Anonymous

Read Chavez' ruling. Just one thing missing. He clearly states five points that evidence must prove, the first of which, that the Charging Party are members of a protected class. I'm very interested to know what evidence legally proves that they are homosexual. Further, what evidence legally proves that the defendants actually knew that the Charging party are homosexual--and that the defendants based their decision to refuse service on that knowledge (as opposed to, say, some other irrational feeling).

Anonymous

Just read Chavez' ruling. One thing missing. He clearly states five points that must be proven by the evidence, the first that the Charging Party are actually members of a protected class.
I'd be very interested in seeing what evidence legally proves that the Charging Party are homosexual. Further, that the defendants somehow knew that the Charging Party are homosexual, and that the defendants refused service based on that knowledge (as opposed to, say, some other irrational belief).

from Richard, V...

Larry A. Singleton is anything BUT "right"
I received two badges of merit in Vietnam, aka Purple Hearts. You don't exactly try to earn a purple heart. You have to be shot, otherwise maimed in combat or DIE in combat to get the badge of merit, and I did everything in my power to AVOID becoming a physical casualty of the Vietnam War.
I have no idea what "feminism" has to do with purple hearts and the suicide of soldiers. I tend to believe that too many men are whiners when it comes to changing a long-practiced, and WRONG, view of women.
I have no idea what the hell type of mother they had who would give them to believe they should be so damn disrespectful to the opposite sex, but my own mother never did anything of the sort. Neither was she overbearing. She showed me by example how deserving women are of respect and I've lived by the example most of my life.
I could care less if women want to go to war on the front lines; I believe they have no idea what they're wishing for and will be sorry they asked to do it, but I have no objection to their doing it if that's what they want to do so badly that they actually fight tooth and nail to get it.
But some people need to stop whining about proper treatment of women and accept that a change has occurred. I for one will absolutely not tolerate a man who disrespects a woman in my presence. You do it in my presence, then you're making it my business. Not only mine either; everyone who sees it should make it their business enough to stop it from happening.

Pages

Stay Informed