Indianapolis Bakery Refuses To Bake Gay Cupcakes

I like how there are two explanations for why the bakery refused the order and remain unsurprised that the article is slanted towards the discriminatory direction.

More Divide & Conquer from the media.

Does nobody find this particular piece of the article profoundly stupid?

Stevi Stoesz, a spokeswoman for City Market, a nonprofit organization with a 13-member board of directors, said officials there found the bakery's alleged conduct inappropriate.

"I find what you may or may not have done to be highly inappropriate... possibly."



edit: How would the bakery have known it was "for" national coming out day? If the student group shared that information it would be their own fault(provided this is because it's for a gay event), or the fault of the husband for assuming.

There's no reason otherwise to refuse a rainbow cake, unless you don't have the necessary ingredients.

The bakery owners refuse service based on a group not fulfilling the requirements of the owners religious tenets.
Is the line drawn at gays, or may a business refuse service to any group that the owners religion might deem sinful?
Can American businesses discriminate against any "lifestyle" choice, including religion?

as private business owners - they have the right to do what they wish - however money is money whether it is rainbow gay or not. it is a big world out there and a lot of people still think it all belongs to them

The gay cupcake thing is brought up because that was what was ordered.

Anyway I am still unclear on whether the couple did have a right to refuse. The lady claimed they did not make cupcakes but the husband went and told the truth, they hate gays.

And they may own the business but it operates in a building that is run by a board of people over seeing it.

I wish that part of the situation were clarified.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


They may hate gays, but they can. It's Amurica damnit! They can hate who they wanna hate. Seriously though..they can. It's their right. It's your right as well as mine to call them bigots and hate them for it if you want. I'm on your side as far as that's concerned, they need to get over it.

But that still doesn't defeat the fact that they don't make cupcakes!

THAT SHOULD BE the issue as far as this City Market is concerned. What the business owner feels doesn't matter.

Now if the group comes in and wants cookies and they still refuse, that's another issue. But it's not what is happening. What is happening is a guy made a statement that really doesn't have much to do with the fact that they CAN'T MAKE CUPCAKES!

Why would you walk into "Just Cookies" for cupcakes anyway?

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Anyway I am still unclear on whether the couple did have a right to refuse. The lady claimed they did not make cupcakes but the husband went and told the truth, they hate gays.

The article doesn't say which of the two took the order, the wife being the owner gave her reason for not taking the order so despite what the husband says and what he believes how does that make his statement the "truth" rather than his wife's?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


As far as I can work out from US law a business has a right to refuse to serve you based on anything they want..

In the UK it is very different as we have discrimination laws that override your personal rights to do what you want with your own business.

It's against the law for people who provide goods or services to discriminate against you because you're lesbian, gay or bisexual. It's also against the law for people who provide goods or services to discriminate against you because you're heterosexual. The law applies to businesses, charities and public bodies such as government agencies, local authorities, education and health facilities.

link

If this had happened in the UK the shop would be in trouble, in the US they are not

I wonder what the definition of a straight cup cake is, one with a picture of a Small Block V8 on it

i'm ashamed of you for making an issue of it.....and for posting wondering if it's stepping on gay rights...
it's not a war on gay rights in this reality...be more private, we'll be proud of all preferances then. don't get blistered up. hey, the heterosexuals have quirks that they keep quiet about....none should be judged, make it where we don't have to judge so blatently. we're all brothers and sisters, it's not us/ them

reply to post by GBP/JPY


I made a thread about it not an issue. I am 100 percent for private business rights. That means if I own a business I can refuse service for whatever reasons, including refusing to serve certain religions or races. ANY reason.

In this case the shop is governed by a Board, so does this business still have the right to refuse service for any reason, or does it have to have the permission of the Board?

Save your shame for yourself.

SO if like next Sept 10th some group orders a few dozen with the twin towers in flames for the next day it shouldn't be an issue?

I see a huge business opportunity in Indianapolis.....a new bakery called Gay Cupcakes. Aside from the bigots, I imagine that the tolerant majority would take their business to an establishment that does not discriminate. I know I would boycott the bakery in the OP article.

Best article I've found is from GayConservative.org

Stupidity Reaches Fever Pitch in Indianapolis

Posted on September 29, 2010 by Mel Maguire

I’ve read about a lot of idiotic things lately. I thought watching people carrying signs that said “stop the Christian Taliban” in San Diego during an anti-Prop 8 protest topped it. I’ve seen something that really one-ups it. The City of Indianapolis is investigating a family-owned business after allegations were made that the owner had discriminated against a customer. How?

gayconservative.org...

reply to post by Annee


That is an excellent blog post by that young man.

It's exactly my view point. There is only one recourse and that is in the lease agreement.

BUT REGARDLESS OF THAT!

It must be remembered that the "gay issue" shouldn't have been brought up, as even if these people were gay themselves, THEY COULD NOT MAKE CUPCAKES AT THIS PLACE. It's called JUST COOKIES for a reason.

when i still had my store in n.m.. i had a gay man work for me.
there was another gay man that would constantly hit on my friend. he'd come in and not leave, hang out, be rudish in his flirting. bother customers etc...
it got to the point that i just 86'd him. get out and don't come back.
the next day i heard the rumor that i was anti-gay and a bigot.
it made me and my gay employee friend laugh at first until i started receiving letters in the mail about people boycotting my store due to my being a bigot.
my friend, and his group of fellow gay friends came to my defense.
it took over a month for things to get back to normal, i lost quite a bit of money.
for a while i was very careful of what i said to whom.
funny thing is, once the rumors started, one of the only groups that came to my defense was a baptist congregation from a local church.
i had a right to refuse service to gays.
when they realized that i had a gay employee and customers it got even worse.
then it went form my right to their right to protest the gays.
it was a mess.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
It must be remembered that the "gay issue" shouldn't have been brought up, as even if these people were gay themselves, THEY COULD NOT MAKE CUPCAKES AT THIS PLACE. It's called JUST COOKIES for a reason.

Yes - I got that part.

But - it is the owner who says he first explains they don't do cupcakes - - - and then volunteers that he wouldn't do it anyway because its for a Gay Event.

Discrimination laws are kind of tricky. If a gay person orders a cookie and you refuse to sell them a cookie simply because they are gay - - that is clear discrimination. If you refuse an order that you know is to promote something against your own personal belief - - that is not discrimination. And everything else falls somewhere in-between.

I've been following this on OutQ radio since it started.

Hahaha, gay cupcakes..

They've got the right not to make "gay cupcakes". Haha.

reply to post by Annee


Well, from what you explained, the owners husband did not discriminate. He is quoted as saying: "I explained we're a family-run business, we have two young, impressionable daughters and we thought maybe it was best not to do"

But the wife, who is, at least in the source article, the only identified owner, says they could have done it anyway. I really think that is the most important part of this.

I will state again that even with what the husband said, I think its morally wrong. I'd serve anyone. "Gay money" buys the same as "straight money"

Still though, I question why this group went looking for cupcakes from a place called "Just Cookies". I haven't said it yet, but to me it seems like this was a little planned on their part. Maybe they already knew this guy's views? I know that is all unfounded, as the group isn't saying much, but it's where my head is now at.

Originally posted by KATSUO
I agree.. Im a business owner and I can and will refuse any job I
dont want to do..

or I just charge double.. then its a win/win

That's what I would have done. Call it a special order and mark it up about 1000%. After all they just make cookies, not cupcakes.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by Annee

 

Well, from what you explained, the owners husband did not discriminate. He is quoted as saying: "I explained we're a family-run business, we have two young, impressionable daughters and we thought maybe it was best not to do"

But the wife, who is, at least in the source article, the only identified owner, says they couldn't have done it anyway. I really think that is the most important part of this.

Yes - correct.

But - then there may be an issue because of where the store is located. Some type city ordinance against discrimination. However - - if you read the details of that - - - its a bit iffy on who exactly dictates behavior of business in that area - - - and how far discrimination laws go.

As far as someone ordering cupcakes from a place that says: Just Cookies - - - I've been to places with names like that - - that sell more then just cookies. So I don't find that unusual at all.

They - - the supporters of "Just Cookies" - - are now using that to discredit gays. That is not right either.

This establishment has the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason.

The fact that they rent a space in a city owned property does not effect their right to refuse a service.

This is Indianapolis not some morally deficient city like Chicago.

This is the bible belt.

I am sure these owners will see a increase in business because of their moral stance.

The Gay's don't like their policy don't go there.

I live where a health food store owner supported and contributed to the proposition to overturn gay marriage.

The Gays wanted everyone to boycott the store.

I believe the owner just recently opened another store,because business is booming.