When a baker bakes a cake for an event, are they endorsing the event? Is a cake an expression of the baker who made it? What kind of expression is it? Generally, when is a prod
6-2 In-class Activity
# Answer the following questions, based on your moral intuitions.
Q1. When a baker bakes a cake for an event, are they endorsing the event?
Q2. Is a cake an expression of the baker who made it? What kind of expression is it?
Q3. Generally, when is a product (sold by a business) an expression of the business owner?
Business Ethics Summer 2022 (1) Week 6, Lecture 2
Chaeyoung Paek
In today’s class…
We’ll see Jack Phillips’ & Jim Campbell’s arguments for the Supreme Court’s decision.
There will be an in-class activity at the end of the class.
Framing the case
Q. How should we frame the Masterpiece Cakeshop case?
Is it about unjust discrimination against gay couples?
Or is it about the artist’s right to free speech & free exercise of religion?
Jim Campbell:
“Should an artist who serves all people be able to decline to create art for an event that conflicts with his deepest convictions?” (Campbell, 1)
Campbell’s argument
P1. If Phillips were to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, he would be making art for an event that conflicts with his sincerely held religious beliefs.
P2. People are not legally or morally obligated to make art for events that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs.
C. Phillips is not morally or legally obligated to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
A valid argument; sound?
Campbell’s argument
Some questions to consider:
When a baker bakes a cake for an event, are they endorsing the event?
Is a cake an artistic expression of the baker who made it?
Generally, when is a product (sold by a business) an expression of the business owner?
Exercise: Baking & Speech
Click ”6-2 In-class Activity” below the lecture video.
Click “Write Submission”; fill in your answers & click “Submit.”
This should take about 5 minutes, but feel free to take more/less time as needed.
Phillips’ argument
In his interview with NYT, Jack Phillips says that he does not make Halloween cakes or adult-themed cakes; for making such cakes does not align with his religious conviction.
He also points out that he offered to sell other items—birthday cakes, desserts, etc.—to the gay couple; it’s just that he cannot sell a wedding cake that will be used for the same-sex wedding.
Phillips’ argument
In this respect, Phillips and Campbell argue that the case should not be framed as a case of wrongful discrimination; Phillips “serves everyone, no matter their race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation” (Campbell, 1).
The motivation for this claim seems to be that Phillips will serve gay customers any of his other baked goods, just not wedding cakes that will be used to celebrate same-sex marriages.
Phillips’ argument
Jim Campbell believes that Phillips’ decision could be defended by pointing out that an artist should have the right to refuse service when their art will be used for an event that does not align with the artist’s personal conviction.
But Jack Phillips also points out that he refuses to offer certain items to all customers (Halloween cakes/adult-themed cakes), and this case in 2012 was just one of such cases.
His point is that not offering a Halloween cake to customers seems to be morally permissible; therefore, not offering a cake for a same-same wedding should be morally permissible as well.
Phillips’ argument
P1. Phillips refuses to sell Halloween cakes because it conflicts with his religious beliefs, and it is morally and legally permissible for him to do so.
P2. If it is morally and legally permissible for Phillips to refuse to sell Halloween cakes, then it is morally and legally permissible for Phillips to refuse to sell wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.
C. It is morally and legally permissible for Phillips to refuse to sell wedding cakes for same-sex weddings.
Valid; sound?
Cf. Argument by analogy
Jack Phillips’s argument is an argument by analogy.
In an argument by analogy, one draws an analogy between two cases: it’s usually the case that one of these two cases is the one of which we have quite clear (moral) intuition.
The strategy is to infer from the similarities that our (moral) intuition about one case should apply to the other case in the same way.
Cf. Argument by analogy
(ex) “Some people argue that there would be fewer mass shootings if more people had guns—especially in the kinds of places where mass shootings occur. But arguing that having more guns will solve the problem of mass shootings is like arguing that smoking more cigarettes will cure lung cancer.”
Adapted from: Stephen King, Twitter post, Oct 28, 2018, 6:02 PM, https://twitter.com/ stephenking/status/1056682753016717312
– The analogy is supposed to hold between [arguing that having more guns will solve the problem of mass shootings] and [arguing that smoking more cigarettes will cure lung cancer].
Cf. Argument by analogy
Here’s a reconstructed version of Stephen King’s argument by analogy:
P1. Arguing that having more guns will solve the problem of mass shootings is like arguing that smoking more cigarettes will cure lung cancer.
P2. It is absurd to argue that smoking more cigarettes will cure lung cancer.
C. It is absurd to argue that having more guns will solve the problem of mass shootings.
Whether this argument is strong or not depends on how strong the analogy holds.
In many cases, the strength of any argument by analogy depends on how strong the analogy is.
Phillips’ argument
A question to consider:
So, is Phillips’ refusal to sell Halloween cakes analogous to his refusal to sell wedding cakes for same-sex weddings?
Can you think of any significant differences between these cases?
John Corvino thinks that there’s a significant difference between two cases.
He argues that refusal to sell Halloween cakes can be morally justified, but refusal to sell wedding cakes for same-sex weddings cannot.
Another argument by analogy?
Another argument by analogy?
In 2014 William Jack went to Azucar Bakery in Denver and requested a Bible-shaped cake decorated with the image of two grooms with a red “X” over them, plus the following paraphrased biblical verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7” and “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:22.”
Azucar’s owner, Marjorie Silva, said that she could not provide such a design; doing so would conflict with her moral beliefs about LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) equality.
She did, however, offer to make the customer a Bible- shaped cake and to provide him with an icing bag so that he could write what he wished. The customer filed a complaint alleging religious discrimination.
Another argument by analogy?
It may seem like Masterpiece Cakeshop case is similar to Azucar Bakery case; both bakers refused to offer a good that they normally offer to other customers.
But the Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled that Marjorie Silva did not discriminate her customer based on his religion.
Q. Is it possible to make both rulings consistent?
– (Corvino) Yes!
For the next class…
We’ll see how John Corvino criticizes Phillips’ argument & how he explains the difference between Masterpiece Cakeshop case and Azucar Bakery case.
Read…
John Corvino, “Drawing a Line in the ‘Gay Wedding Cake’ Case”, New York Times
John Corvino, “The Kind of Cake, Not the Kind of Customer”
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
