Could a Catholic bake a cake for a gay wedding?

[theCardinalbird]

Say no, nicely.

Are you asking whether it would be permissible to sell it to them, in such a circumstance? I’m not sure. It seems like the sin of scandal, but no other potential sin.

I see. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

There is nothing custom-made about a condom. It is an item in general commerce.

I agree. But most wedding cakes are picked out of catalogs. In such a case, there is nothing “custom” about them, either.

 

[Kei]

I see it like this.
If a gay couple were getting married, would you give them money to throw the ceremony?
I wouldn’t.
Supplying a service is like investing my capital, except instead of monetary support, I am investing my material and my time to help this unlawful (not in legal terms but religious) union.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I don’t know how “most wedding cakes” work. Mine was custom made. The people who came to this baker came to him for a custom cake. They brought a folder of designs they wanted. That is how this case ended up at the Supreme Court.

If they wanted a catalog cake, they could have gone someplace that made them and picked one.

 

[Todd_Easton]

Considering what St Paul said in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13 and 10:23-33, about not eating meat offered to idols not so much for our own sake but for the sake of others, lest by following our example but with the wrong intention they commit sin, I think a Catholic could bake a cake for a gay wedding as long as in doing so he does not intend to celebrate the wedding but, since those who don’t know his intention are very likely to misperceive his action as an endorsement of gay weddings, he ought not to bake such a cake, lest others are wrongly-encouraged by his example into supporting gay weddings.

 

[theCardinalbird]

What about this story. Could we apply this sort of thinking to the cake case?:

“the story in 2 Kings 5 of God’s kindness to Naaman, a foreigner suffering from leprosy. After being healed Naaman devoted himself entirely to Israel’s God and vowed to worship no other. There remained one problem. Naaman was a servant of the King of Syria who worshiped another deity. Being old and weak, the King needed Naaman’s help kneeling during worship. Naaman asked the Lord, through Elisha, to excuse him for this action. Elisha responded, “Go in peace.” Naaman was not told to refuse service to his master, or to not enter the “house of Rimmon” the foreign deity. Instead God permitted Naaman to continue serving the Syrian king and to even kneel before the idol because he understood that Naaman’s loyalty belonged to the Lord.”

 

[Kei]

Yes, it’s a castle, and I could tell it was a castle.

But it also looks like, well, how do I put it? Something that would fit with a gay wedding.

 

[Bon_Croix]

Do businesses have freedom of association?

 

[Bon_Croix]

I’m sure the Catholic Church would never allow Catholics to neglect the legitimate needs of non-Catholics/non practicing Catholics.

The question is one of rights and duties.

Does a Catholic have a duty to provide for the non-necessities of non-Catholics/non practicing Catholics? I know of no where in the CCC where that is stated.

Further, I know of no where in the Bible where it says Christians must treat everyone equally. Love does not equate to equal treatment.

 

[jfz178]

Have you been to a lot of those?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

But it also looks like, well, how do I put it? Something that would fit with a gay wedding.

I assure you that if the goal is phallic hedonism, a gay man would see no reason to get married. Gay men and lesbians get married for much the same reasons straight people get married.

 

[Kei]

It was merely a way to tie back to the thread topic.
But, monogamy is actually fairly rare in the gay community

 

[Prodigal_Son]

It was merely a way to tie back to the thread topic.

But, monogamy is actually fairly rare in the gay community

I know it wasn’t meant badly, at all, so no worries there. You’re right about monogamy being rare, but that’s not related to the point I was making. Straight people in our society get married for romance and companionship, and maybe starting a family. The same reasons apply to gay people. Hedonism is more common among gay men than any other segment of the population, BUT getting married is not a way that they encourage their own hedonism.

 

[Kei]

It’s kinda hard to start a family in such condition…
They can adopt, though, which can be OK (even though the poor child will be missing either a mother or a father figure depending on the sex of the “betrothed”).
What’s not as good is when they mix their semen and impregnate a woman via artificial insemination.

But I don’t think all those getting “married” like this have a very high view of marriage. Hopefully it is a commitment to monogamy, but I’m not always so hopeful.
The same of course applies to heterosexual couples as well in this divorce and cheat happy world.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The same of course applies to heterosexual couples as well in this divorce and cheat happy world.

Ahhhh, but this is my point. And frankly, I think we need to separate out the REASONS why people get married from the INTENTIONS of those who marry. Gay people marry for the same reasons as straight people, but I find it plausible that gay men may be less likely to intend monogamy.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I find it plausible that gay men may be less likely to intend monogamy.

That’s really biased. A lot of the gay couples who have gotten married have been together and monogamous already for many years.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

That’s really biased. A lot of the gay couples who have gotten married have been together and monogamous already for many years.

Biased? I speak as a bisexual man. I know a good number of gay and bisexual men, many of whom have talked to me about what they want out of marriages.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Biased? I speak as a bisexual man. I know a good number of gay and bisexual men, many of whom have talked to me about what they want out of marriages.

I know a good number of gay people too, and when they bother to marry each other it is generally with the expectation or plan to be monogamous.
It is different sometimes when they marry a heterosexual partner.

In any event, you can’t presume that gay men are less likely to intend monogamy than straight men. Even if they are planning to cheat, there are a lot of straight men who are not planning to be 100 percent faithful to their wives. They’re just less forward about saying so.

 

[2towers]

Really… it is far more dangerous to tell a lie, than it is to make a cake for gay people. For the cake, you could get a whole lot of money, and you can pray for the people at the same time. For telling a lie you could do 20 years in purgatory or worse.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I know a good number of gay people too, and when they bother to marry each other it is generally with the expectation or plan to be monogamous.

It is different sometimes when they marry a heterosexual partner.

I’m a bit perplexed here, Tis. I don’t have any experience talking to people who have married someone of the opposite sex with the intent to cheat on them with someone of the same sex. I have experience talking with gay guys who intended to be romantically exclusive and monogamous, but didn’t consider sexual liaisons outside of their marriage off limits.

In any event, you can’t presume that gay men are less likely to intend monogamy than straight men. Even if they are planning to cheat, there are a lot of straight men who are not planning to be 100 percent faithful to their wives. They’re just less forward about saying so.

I’m talking about open relationships. And I’m not presuming anything. If you look at publicly available statistics, or if you were a same-sex attracted man who talked to these people face to face, you would have the same evidence I have. But frankly, they’re not likely to tell straight people their honest intentions, since it would be perceived by straight people as being promiscuous. But frankly, if you’re actively gay (and you don’t have kids), there is no biological reason to be monogamous. At best, there is simply reason to avoid disease.