The right to refuse service is an item of discussion on the tips of tongues at water coolers across America this fine Wednesday. Colorado baker Jack Phillips won the ability to not bake a cake for same-sex couple Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins on the grounds that it violated his deeply held beliefs. The same beliefs we have argued about and fought for for years.
As a business owner, you reserve the right to refuse service. As a patron, you reserve the right to not be discriminated against. If we fall back to Reynolds v. United States, separation of church and state, it’s quite difficult to draw the line between what is something you can and cannot legally partake in. It seems that what constitutes as unconstitutional is what extends to government buildings and schools. Private businesses, on the other hand, have flexibility.
The LGBT battle has shown strides lately with same-sex marriages legalized in various states across the country; however, the services that provide unforgettable experiences – services like a cake, flowers, photography – have maintained their “deeply held beliefs” as a crutch against the plight LGBT couples face. Same-sex marriage is law. With law, comes the obligation to uphold it. Same sex marriage was established nationwide in the landmark civil rights case of Obergefell v. Hodges, in which it was held that the right of same-sex couples to marry on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples, with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities, is guaranteed by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Therefore, it is discriminatory to prohibit giving services to one couple based on their orientation.
This instance was argued differently. Phillips was arguing that the creation of an original design and custom piece was artistic expression and therefore he would be protected under his first admentment rights. According to the state, at this time, the need to protect the first ammendment outweighs the definition of discriminaiton here. At least, what discrimination meant in the past. Restricting rights that are given to most by law.
While this is a bump in the road to several appeal cases currently in progress, it does spell to be an interesting look into what the court deems as discrimination and whether or not the true separation of church and state even exists anymore.