Supreme Court Sides With Colorado Baker Who Turned Away Gay Couple

[Spartanmack]

It's in my racial bias post:


https://therealdeal.com/2012/07/12/wells-fargo-slammed-with-a-175-million-discrimination-charge/


They had to pay $175 million in the settlement. But people didn't take their business elsewhere as a result.

first of all, this is an example of price discrimination, which I'm OK with having laws to protect against. But second, how do you know people didn't take their business elsewhere? There's nothing in the article at all about lost business with existing customers let alone, lost opportunity with new customers, particularly Hispanics and blacks who might have considered doing business with WF if not for this discrimination case...

 

[Gulo Blue]

that's what we disagree on, so that is at least part of what we're talking about.

I don't know if you are arguing otherwise, but to me a lot less racist than the 60's is a lower bar than so not-racist we don't need this non-discrimination law.

I get that my use of "that much" didn't make it clear enough what I was trying to say.

(underlining for clarity instead of using quotes because it feels more clear to me.)

 

[Gulo Blue]

first of all, this is an example of price discrimination, which I'm OK with having laws to protect against. But second, how do you know people didn't take their business elsewhere? There's nothing in the article at all about lost business with existing customers let alone, lost opportunity with new customers, particularly Hispanics and blacks who might have considered doing business with WF if not for this discrimination case...

Tinsel didn't even know that this had happened. Probably most people don't know that this happened. I didn't know before I put together that racial bias post. By what mechanism can the invisible hand guide me to make decisions based on information I'm unaware of?

 

[tinselwolverine]

Tinsel didn't even know that this had happened. Probably most people don't know that this happened. I didn't know before I put together that racial bias post. By what mechanism can the invisible hand guide me to make decisions based on information I'm unaware of?

In the article, Wells Fargo denied wrongdoing and claimed the settlement was for expediency.

Who the hell knows?

I am surprised that I had never heard this story before.

 

[Gulo Blue]

In the article, Wells Fargo denied wrongdoing and claimed the settlement was for expediency.

Who the hell knows?

I am surprised that I had never heard this story before.

And that's what would likely happen if it came to denial of loans rather than higher interest rates. There'd be no formal policy or admission, just a settlement and denial.

 

[Spartanmack]

Tinsel didn't even know that this had happened. Probably most people don't know that this happened. I didn't know before I put together that racial bias post. By what mechanism can the invisible hand guide me to make decisions based on information I'm unaware of?

again, in cases like this, you don't have to convince me that the invisible hand itself might not be enough because I'm not arguing to get rid of all anti-discrimination laws. I've even named (at least twice) those protecting against discrimination in pricing and employment as ones I think are necessary.

 

[Gulo Blue]

again, in cases like this, you don't have to convince me that the invisible hand itself might not be enough because I'm not arguing to get rid of all anti-discrimination laws. I've even named (at least twice) those protecting against discrimination in pricing and employment as ones I think are necessary.

I get that, but I'm arguing against your claim that the market would take care of service discrimination. I'm saying it doesn't correct against pricing discrimination, so it wouldn't correct against service discrimination.


The issue would be muddied by the complexity of it all and and if someone did put together evidence that it was happening, there'd be a settlement, and the market wouldn't correct it.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I also missed that Bank of America settled a similar case for $335 million:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/business/us-settlement-reported-on-countrywide-lending.html


"A department investigation concluded that Countrywide loan officers and brokers charged higher fees and rates to more than 200,000 minority borrowers across the country than to white borrowers who posed the same credit risk."

 

[Spartanmack]

I get that, but I'm arguing against your claim that the market would take care of service discrimination. I'm saying it doesn't correct against pricing discrimination, so it wouldn't correct against service discrimination.


The issue would be muddied by the complexity of it all and and if someone did put together evidence that it was happening, there'd be a settlement, and the market wouldn't correct it.

I disagree - just look at all the boycotts of businesses and products that are happening nearly daily. Often, you'll get a reaction from the other side like in the case where SJWs called for a boycott of Chic-fil-A over the marriage equality issue and the opposition reacted by lining up for blocks to eat at their restaurants. I doubt you'd have anyone on the other side throwing their monetary support behind a business that openly refused to serve people of a certain race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

 

[b311j]

no, as far as I can tell, he's perfectly OK with 2 gay men (or women) spending their lives together. But in accordance with his Christian faith, he believes marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman.

What a cute circle this conversation has gone in. No we are right back to him pushing his religion.

 

[tinselwolverine]

What a cute circle this conversation has gone in. No we are right back to him pushing his religion.

I guess he could have made a custom cake that said "these two gay sinners will fry in Hell for all of eternity for their sins," and the little statues could be candles which would, well, slowly burn.

They wanted to pay for his custom touch, right?

Now, THAT there would be pushing his religion.

 

[Spartanmack]

What a cute circle this conversation has gone in. No we are right back to him pushing his religion.

we never left - his religiously based refusal has always been a big part of the argument. although it's still not correct to say he's forcing his beliefs onto the plaintiffs, if that's the point you're trying to make.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I just want to chime in with vote #3 on "refusing to bake a cake isn't pushing your religion on someone else".

 

[b311j]

I just want to chime in with vote #3 on "refusing to bake a cake isn't pushing your religion on someone else".

Agree to disagree I guess. When one says they are refusing to do their job based on religious beliefs I see that as pushing their religion.

 

[Michchamp]

Agree to disagree I guess. When one says they are refusing to do their job based on religious beliefs I see that as pushing their religion.

I agree.

Again... if you want to discriminate against someone based on their race, gender, or sexual preference - all things beyond their control - don't open to the general public.

Also: do humanity a favor and take a long walk off a short pier.

 

[Gulo Blue]

If you're going to push your religion, it seems like identifying the religion you're pushing is a required step. If someone refuses to serve you, you don't even necessarily know what religion they are.

 

[b311j]

To be clear, as Ive said before, the baker DOES have the right to refuse service. But when his dumbass comes out and says its because his particular skydaddy says marriage is a man and a woman, even though the Supreme Court says otherwise, well now we are discussing a whole different matter. Gods law, whichever of the 4200 of them you worship, does NOT go before our nation's law. But as long as we continue to put zealots in the White House, I guess Im on the wrong side of the debates.

 

[Michchamp]

It's also absurd because the teachings of Christ are so unequivocable in terms of showing mercy and brotherhood to all people, period, with no exclusions, that for someone to claim their Christian faith has lead them to discriminate, it just shows how little they understand their own faith.

I realized a long time ago - back even when I still considered myself Catholic - that for most people, religion is just their gang affiliation. a tribal identifier. They've mindlessly picked a side, - or more likely were brought up in it - and they're sticking to it.

If you try to take them at their word, that they have sincere religious beliefs then you just end up confused how someone could refuse to do something for someone based on who that person is, then on Sunday go listen to their priest say "when you do this for the least of my brothers, you do it for me."

 

[Michchamp]

If you're going to push your religion, it seems like identifying the religion you're pushing is a required step. If someone refuses to serve you, you don't even necessarily know what religion they are.

Oh, look who just stepped on to a slippery slope.

Everyone who's religion used a substance later classified as an illegal narcotic by the DEA is interested in hearing where you go with this.

 

[Gulo Blue]

To be clear, as Ive said before, the baker DOES have the right to refuse service. But when his dumbass comes out and says its because his particular skydaddy says marriage is a man and a woman, even though the Supreme Court says otherwise, well now we are discussing a whole different matter. Gods law, whichever of the 4200 of them you worship, does NOT go before our nation's law. But as long as we continue to put zealots in the White House, I guess Im on the wrong side of the debates.

I disagree with how you frame the sides of the debate. I'm in agreement that he has to make a generic wedding cake if he makes generic wedding cakes for others and I don't personally think calling all his cakes custom gets him out of it (though I'm not exactly sure on where that line is.)


But discriminating because of your religion (illegal) does not constitute pushing your religion (which is and should be legal in most cases.)