Make me a cake or I'll call the Police

Gareth Lee is a bully and a prick.

Gareth Lee

Before I start, for the avoidance of doubt, let's get three things clear:

1. I'm not a Christian, and I find some elements of Christianity to be not only irrational but also immoral.

2. I'm not gay.

3. I fully support two people of the same sex being able to get married, just like two of the opposite sex, and I find fear or hatred of people because they are homosexual/lesbian/bisexual to be both irrational and immoral.

So from a libertarian perspective, the Asher's Bakery case in Northern Ireland is an interesting one.

The long and the short of it is that a gay rights activist in Northern Ireland asked a bakery to bake a cake with a pro-gay marriage slogan on it, and the bakery objected because the owners oppose gay marriage, because of their religious beliefs.

The court has ruled that refusing to bake the cake is illegal "discrimination".  What this ruling represents is a fundamental infringement on two rights:

1. Freedom of trade;

2. Freedom of speech.

I've had a few arguments on Twitter about this, with the usual leftwing identity politics advocates claiming this is a victory of "equality" over "bigotry" and that "discrimination" is wrong, and when I focus on the fundamental facts they get agitated, because the facts are very clear indeed.  Set aside the claim that Gareth Lee (the gay rights activist) was deliberating bating the bakery, or that an order had been made for the cake, then refused after it had been taken (Gareth Lee didn't claim a breach of contract after all).

The most fundamental freedom you have is the right to control your own body, which means your freedom to act or choose not to act.  That naturally extends itself to the right to decide whether or not you make something.  In this case, a cake.  If you associate freely with others to set up a business producing cakes and selling them to order, that's again a group of individuals co-operating in a formal manner to offer to make goods for others.  It's entirely voluntary.  It's an invitation to trade, but there is no obligation to do so.  Asher's Bakery could close down tomorrow, could choose to make only one type of cake or start baking biscuits instead.  This, is freedom.

That freedom should and must include the right to decline to produce a product, whether it be on religious, political or any grounds.  Freedom of trade is the right to refuse to trade with anyone, and not even have to give a reason.

Why?

Because the alternative is a form of slavery.  It is the idea that just because a producer has decided to produce, potential consumers have a right to demand this.  It is, as much as the petulent "progressive" left demands it, demanding a "right to a cake made by someone else".

There is no right to demand anyone produce anything for you, just as there is no right to demand you buy something whether or not you want it or not.  

No, you cry.  What if it meant more businesses said they wouldn't deal with gay customers? Or black customers? Or Jewish customers?  That would be the consequence of repealing the law on discrimination in trade.

Firstly, it works two ways.  I know I wouldn't shop at stores that refused to deal with customers on such vile grounds because yes, I don't like "homophobia" myself.   People could boycott, suppliers could boycott the bigoted bakeries.  In other words, the democracy of the free market would challenge bigotry.  Sure, some people would buy and supply goods and services, but in essence people's views would be expressed by their own freedom to trade, as it should be.  Let's be clear here, 

Secondly, people are free to set up competing bakeries, and bake themselves.  There are no specific legal barriers to entry in this market.   

Just consider what the implication of the law is, it is to force someone to bake a cake for someone else. 

Furthermore, let's consider what the objection to baking the cake was about.  The request was to bake a cake which had a slogan to celebrate gay marriage.  Asher's Bakery opposes gay marriage. However, Gareth Lee wanted Asher's Bakery to use its property and labour to express an opinion it disagrees with.  

Gareth Lee, of course, has freedom of speech.  He can and should feel free to speak, write or bake a cake if he wishes, to express his support for gay marriage.  He can also seek the services of another to do the same.  However, freedom of speech does not include any right to force another to provide you with a platform for your expression.  Just as Asher's Bakery can't force Gareth Lee to write a letter saying he opposes gay marriage, neither should Gareth Lee be able to force Asher's Bakery to bake a cake to celebrate it.

As an aside, because it does not alter the fundamental point, gay marriage is illegal in Northern Ireland.  This merely exacerbates the absurdity of it.  It is illegal in Northern Ireland to refuse to bake a cake, even though that cake celebrates an act which is illegal.

Furthermore, the court ruling itself makes it clear that such discrimination is illegal on political grounds.  That raises visions of Catholic bakeries being demanded to bake Orange Order celebrating cakes, or Protestant ones glorifying Bobby Sands.  Jewish bakeries being demanded to bake swastika cakes, or socialist bakeries demanded to bake cakes celebrating Margaret Thatcher, or as some have said, demanding Muslim bakers bake an image of Mohammed to celebrate atheism. 

Where does this take us?  Those who have the best intentions, to remove hatred and bigotry, have taken away freedom to trade, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and underneath all that, the right to decide what you do with your own time and body.  You cannot refuse to bake a cake that depicts a view that you disagree with, because it hurts the feelings of the person who wants the cake, even if being forced to bake the cake hurts your feelings.  It isn't even the purported "equality".

That isn't "gay rights", it's the demands of a petulant child who demands what he wants from someone who objects to the demand and refuses to give in.

Notwithstanding, of course, that the use of imagery of Bert and Ernie may well be a breach of intellectual property rights,  but given Gareth Lee and his bullying braying mob don't care much about genuine rights I doubt they care about that.

The lesson of course is clear.  Don't let nanny state find out that you've committed a thought crime by refusing to bake a cake on grounds nanny deems illegal.  Give any other credible reason.

For me, it's because he's obnoxious.