Masterpiece Cake V. Augustone Case Analysis

Like a tale seemingly spun from The Onion, Masterpiece Cake v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is a case where everything seems too ridiculous to be true. The root of the issue stems from the city of Lakewood, Colorado, in which a gay couple was denied the right to a custom-made cake from Jack Phillips, the head of Masterpiece Cakes. Disgruntled by their treatment, Charlie Craig and David Mullins aptly filed charges of discrimination to which the state found merit, and Phillips quickly shot back with appeals of his own, leading us to this current situation. Now, after having been argued in front of the Supreme Court, the case lies in dormancy, waiting for its verdict come spring. During its time in the public eye, this case has been a hot button topic for many wanting to chime in with their opinion across the United States. Some cry that discriminating based on sexual orientation is just the same as any other type of discrimination, while others insist that Mr. Phillips had every right to deny customers because he ran a private business. As the arguments

In that case, this really would be no different from hating specific race groups or other religions. Running a business, in this day and age, should not allow someone to turn customers away based solely on who they are or who they love. While some have compared it to the rule of “No shoes, No shirt, No service”, that would be likening someone’s identity down to something material and exchangeable. It is impossible for someone to change races or sexualities at the drop of a hat, but it’s much easier to get clothed and get served. Therefore, faulty comparisons that dehumanize the circumstances should be avoided at all cost because all they serve to do is offend and play down the importance of the