Sidenote: Ths is made purely of fiction and many ideas and opinions that I thought of while debating this topic. However, this debate is also being taken up by the US Supreme Court at the moment.

After having dinner, the invitees of the Smith’s monthly dinner party sat down, preparing themselves for the intense yet political routine of debating over certain issues. As all 12 seated themselves at the sides of the long and dark wooden table, the Smith’s sat at the two ends, directly facing each other.

Everyone was anxious, waiting for one of the Smith’s to flip over the card, revealing the controversial issue that would then be discussed. Corrine Smith then got up from the end of the table, and after walking to the side-middle of it, flipped over the card.

“Does a baker in the US have the right to reject a same-sex couple based on religious beliefs” it stated. Just after Corrine had returned to her seat, Alexis, a young liberal, radical some would say announced “Well certainly it would be immoral to think of rejecting a same-sex couple, simply because your religious beliefs go against it. So what? I mean, just because you’re on a diet doesn’t mean that everyone else has to be on a diet too.”

She continued on saying that “the church and the state are separated in this country. That is why we don’t have prayers in public schools or are required to say ‘under God’ in the pledge of allegiance. To further add onto my point, the actions of this baker not only are not rational due to his religious beliefs, but also because he outright discriminates against this couple simply because of their sexuality. It’s outright sickening and lunacy I say.

Actions like this need to be illegal. We aren’t in the 1950s anymore”. She then stopped talking, and then took a sip of her champagne, giving off an air of superiority around the room.

“Well, I’m sorry but I have to disagree with you Alexis” replied Paige, an older woman who was a staunch conservative Republican. She was one of those people that are labeled as Evangelicals.

“I actually sympathize with the baker in this situation since he physically cannot endorse the same-sex wedding due to his religion. I mean, it says so plainly in the Bible that a marriage is between one man and one woman, and that a man should not lie with man as if he lies with woman. Also, a baker has his own right to control the business however he wants. He isn’t a doctor, he didn’t take the oath to treat all patients regardless of their race, gender or sexuality. He simply bakes cakes, and there is no sort of life-saving in his work.”

She then looked around the table, glaring at them, as if expecting them to see the morality of the baker in this situation. She then refilled her glass of water.

The table then fell to a deep silence, with many puzzled at what to say next. Most of the people in this way, were caught in the middle of the situation since they saw that yes, it was not right for the baker to refuse a cake to the same-sex couple simply because of his religious beliefs, but also understood that the baker has their own right to operate their business in whatever way they please. Mrs. Smith, who was usually quiet during these political discussions finally rose to speak.

“I have to disagree with both of you, since the baker does have a right to operate their business in their own style, yet it is also wrong to discriminate against people simply because of basic features or factors about them. Yes, his religious beliefs told him that same-sex marriage was sinful, but in baking the cake, he is not endorsing the wedding, he is just making a cake. And actually, by making the cake, he would still be gaining a profit, compared to if he did not choose to bake the cake. However, I also do see that if the government does rule on this decision anytime soon, it could then possibly restrict religious freedom, which is protected by the US constitution. Because if a law was passed forcing bakers to continue to serve clients, even if it goes against their beliefs, then it would then lessen the freedom they have to practice their religion, since it would be illegal for them to deny what they feel is wrong. While I do disagree with the point that church and state should be together, I also do believe that businesses do have the right to operate themselves as they like, as long as it is not discriminatory. And since in this case, the baker is being discriminatory, then I believe that he should be making the cake. In fact, I believe that if there was a law that dealt with this issue, that it would say that the baker has the right to deny service to their customers unless it is based on gender, race, sex, or sexuality. Therefore, not only would this benefit the left side of the party, but would also reduce the damage as seen in the eyes of the right side of the party. That simply is what I believe.”

She then sat down silently.

After a few more repetitive arguments on the topic, more cards were flipped, revealing topics such as gun control, abortion, marijuana, racism and other. And while the other guests continued to chatter and give their own points of view on these matters, Mrs. Smith looked to her left, right, then straight down the table at her guests. “I still can’t believe that discrimination after hundreds of years is still alive and well in this country” she whispered, and silently got up from the table and walked upstairs.