Colorado baker ordered to make wedding cake

Which makes him an involuntary servant of the gay couple who sued him.

Let’s put this as simply as possible. An indentured servant is someone who agrees to provide labor in exchange for money. This was employed by immigrants seeking passage to America.

An involuntary servant, on the other hand, is someone who is forced against his will to provide a service or labor in exchange for monetary compensation.

The Colorado baker was sued by a gay couple after he refused to bake them a wedding cake. He has been ordered by the state’s Civil Rights Commission to not only bake it, but they have also told him he must engage in a series of soviet-esque training for his employees and submit a report to show he isn’t discriminating against homosexuals.

In other words, the gay couple are entitled to goods and services from him which he must provide in return for monetary compensation under the threat of violence against him and his property.

First, let’s bear this in mind. Colorado does not allow same-sex marriage, so this is sort of like a race car driver handing out speeding tickets during the Indy 500.

Secondly, this entire matter demonstrates why so many people remain opposed to gay marriage. It’s not that they think gay people shouldn’t be allowed to get married. They see lawsuits like this and know that they are giving up their rights if it becomes legal. Colorado does not recognize it and yet the commission ruled unanimously that he had discriminated against the couple.

Thirdly, the couple who sued him are thugs. They had plenty of other options to choose from in the area to find a wedding cake. He was not the only one in town who could bake one. They chose to sue him purely out of spite in an effort to coerce him into obeying them or putting him out of business altogether.

From a libertarian point of view, it has nothing to do with the morality or immorality of homosexuality. It has to do with property rights. A private property owner has the right to decide what happens with and on his property. This is no different than someone deciding who they will invite to their wedding. Discrimination is employed. Some people get to come, others are left off the list. Or, when literary agents openly list genres they do not represents, such as horror, erotica, religious, ext.

Decrying “discrimination” is a subterfuge in order to restrict religious liberties in this country. It is no different than if a Christian couple sued a bakery that refused to bake wedding cakes with religious themes on it, such as a cross or church or cathedral. Atheist bakers shouldn’t be coerced into serving Christians anymore than Christians should be forced into serving those who hold different views.

This indirect violence can only be carried out through the State. Without the State, the couple would have gone to another bakery and the world would have still continued in spite of the baker’s discrimination against them. There would be no controversy over gay marriage or gay weddings because the whole matter would be privatized.

But because we have this institution in place, which relies solely on the use of coercion and violence, we get ideological battles over matters like homosexuality and in whose hands the weapon of the State will be carried to strike down their enemy.

The irony of this story, however, is that instead of shutting him down the couple only inspired those in the community who share his values to back him up.

According to the New York Daily News:

Phillips isn’t too worried about his business shutting down—he says business is booming at Masterpiece Cakeshop. His brownies and cookies are reportedly flying off the counters, snatched up by people who agree with his stance on gay marriage.

This entry was posted in Central Government, libertarianism, Slavery and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Colorado baker ordered to make wedding cake

  1. greattomato says:

    I dig the sentiment of not wanting a court to order you to do business, but what kind of businessperson gives up business in the first place?


    • The Question says:

      People do not engage in behavior or actions when they feel it violates their religious convictions, including business transactions. According to the article, the baker was willing to bake them cupcakes or any other item on the menu, but not a wedding cake because he felt he was participating in the wedding ceremony. Whether this is good for business is really up for the owner to decide and the free market to determine.


      • greattomato says:

        Yeah I dig that. I just think it makes the baker a bad business owner. Clearly he has profited from the situation though, which is a sad statement of people’s beliefs regarding gay individuals. So in the end it was a good business move. Who knows. I after the state should stay out of it. If a business owner wants to give up business for whatever reason that’s his problem.


  2. Pingback: The Right to Refuse Service | sub tyrannis

  3. Pingback: Mainstream Conservatism a Product of State Meddling | The Anarchist Notebook | Libertarian Anarchy

  4. Pingback: To the Victor…. | The Anarchist Notebook | Libertarian Anarchy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s