Bakery vs. bakeshop

The Supreme Court just heard arguments in the case of Jack Phillips's Masterpiece Cakeshop.  Phillips, for religious reasons, refused to create a custom cake for a ceremony involving two men attempting to get married.  The homosexuals sued.  The State of Colorado Civil Rights Commission took up the case in favor of the homosexuals.  Their claim was that the cake shop is a public accommodation and therefore must accommodate the demands of all of its customers.

Now, Phillips said that he would sell any of his premade cakes to anyone without restriction.  In this he was acting as a public accommodation.  But, he said, he will not create a cake that violates his religious principles.  That, he claimed, is his First Amendment right.  Thus, the battle lines were drawn, and the case proceeded up to the Supreme Court.

The arguments made in this case have to do with the conflict between civil rights (public accommodation) and religious freedom (an individual's fundamental right).  That is fine, but there is a much deeper and far more concerning question.  It is one that has not been publicly discussed – one in which there is great danger.

A bakery is not a bakeshop!  A bakeshop is not a bakery.  This is true even if the two are co-located, as is the case with Masterpiece Cakeshop. 

A bakery is a manufacturing facility.  A bakeshop sells products made in a baking factory.  These are two separate entities with two completely different functions. 

What is really at stake here is the ability of someone to walk into a factory and demand that the factory produce a product he desires.  Moreover, if the Court decision goes against Phillips, that walk-in will have the power of the state to enforce his demand.  The broad precedent will be set.

Understand clearly that if the Supreme Court decides against Phillips, the entire legal foundation for manufacturing in the United States will be destroyed.  The legal precedent for malicious lawsuits against any manufacturing company will be devastating.  It is unlikely that anyone will take the risk of setting up a new factory in that legal environment.  Existing manufacturers will be powerfully encouraged to migrate their facilities out of the country.  The U.S. economy will be devastated.

Soon enough, the real impact of a decision against Phillips will be understood, and a future court case will result in a reversal of the decision against Phillips.  In the meantime, our economy will be badly damaged and take a long time to recover.

I hope the Supreme Court will recognize the extreme danger posed by this case.  A bakery is not a bakeshop.

The Supreme Court just heard arguments in the case of Jack Phillips's Masterpiece Cakeshop.  Phillips, for religious reasons, refused to create a custom cake for a ceremony involving two men attempting to get married.  The homosexuals sued.  The State of Colorado Civil Rights Commission took up the case in favor of the homosexuals.  Their claim was that the cake shop is a public accommodation and therefore must accommodate the demands of all of its customers.

Now, Phillips said that he would sell any of his premade cakes to anyone without restriction.  In this he was acting as a public accommodation.  But, he said, he will not create a cake that violates his religious principles.  That, he claimed, is his First Amendment right.  Thus, the battle lines were drawn, and the case proceeded up to the Supreme Court.

The arguments made in this case have to do with the conflict between civil rights (public accommodation) and religious freedom (an individual's fundamental right).  That is fine, but there is a much deeper and far more concerning question.  It is one that has not been publicly discussed – one in which there is great danger.

A bakery is not a bakeshop!  A bakeshop is not a bakery.  This is true even if the two are co-located, as is the case with Masterpiece Cakeshop. 

A bakery is a manufacturing facility.  A bakeshop sells products made in a baking factory.  These are two separate entities with two completely different functions. 

What is really at stake here is the ability of someone to walk into a factory and demand that the factory produce a product he desires.  Moreover, if the Court decision goes against Phillips, that walk-in will have the power of the state to enforce his demand.  The broad precedent will be set.

Understand clearly that if the Supreme Court decides against Phillips, the entire legal foundation for manufacturing in the United States will be destroyed.  The legal precedent for malicious lawsuits against any manufacturing company will be devastating.  It is unlikely that anyone will take the risk of setting up a new factory in that legal environment.  Existing manufacturers will be powerfully encouraged to migrate their facilities out of the country.  The U.S. economy will be devastated.

Soon enough, the real impact of a decision against Phillips will be understood, and a future court case will result in a reversal of the decision against Phillips.  In the meantime, our economy will be badly damaged and take a long time to recover.

I hope the Supreme Court will recognize the extreme danger posed by this case.  A bakery is not a bakeshop.

RECENT VIDEOS