#CakeGate: can you refuse service on the basis of faith?

Service should not be denied because of someone’s view on identity

Question: #CakeGate: can you refuse service on the basis of faith?
Position‹4 of 4: Some kinds of service can be refused on grounds of religion but not all
Argument: Service should not be denied because of someone’s view on identity

The idea of what identity is has changed considerably over the last couple of decades. Gender and sexuality have become more diverse than it was in the early 21st century. Unfortunately, many religions don’t approve of these changes because they don’t acknowledge them as identity.

The argument

The idea of identity has changed over the years. People used to identify mostly as heterosexual and cisgender; now people can be gay, asexual, transgender or non-conforming, and the range of recognised identities is wider than the vocabulary that existed a generation ago. It is this expansion that has brought new identities into conflict with religion. Some religious beliefs, especially within Christianity, hold that there should only be two genders and that heterosexuality is the only legitimate form of sexuality; homosexuality is considered a sin within those beliefs. The clash is real and should not be understated. But as the world changes, what might be considered a sin by one person is the identity of another, and that asymmetry is what the argument turns on. A sin is something a person does and could refrain from doing; an identity is not. Treating the second as though it were the first asks someone to stop being who they are, which is not a request that can be met. It would therefore be insensitive to decide that a person's identity does not matter simply because it differs from what has been taken as the norm. A norm records what has been common, not what is owed to people who fall outside it. This reasoning applies directly to the service of customers. Service should not be denied to someone who identifies differently from past standards, because the refusal is not directed at anything the customer has done — it is directed at what they are. Identity is who someone is, and that is something no one can change, which is precisely why it is not a legitimate basis on which to turn a person away.

Context

Homosexuality and sexualities beyond heterosexual behavior has been regarded as unnatural for centuries. Often, people who weren’t heterosexual were murdered or mistreated. He same went for people who identified as a gender other than male or female. In 2009, the Matthew Shephard Act became a new anti-hate law against people who weren’t heterosexual. In 2015, the Supreme Court could not ban same sex marriage. In 2017, transgender individuals were acknowledged for the gender they transitioned to. Society has changed to include people of all genders and sexualities as equal.

Premises

[P1]Identity has expanded beyond the old heterosexual, cisgender norm to include gay, asexual, transgender, and non-conforming people. [P2] Some religious beliefs treat these identities as sin, but what one faith calls sin is another person's core identity, which they cannot change. [P3] It would be insensitive to deny that someone's identity matters simply because it differs from past standards, and that applies to serving customers. [C] Therefore, because service should not be denied because of someone's view on identity, only some kinds of service may be refused on religious grounds, not all.

Counter-arguments

Religious people believe religion is their identity. Identity is a set of values that someone upholds in their life. Religious people follow their religion to the point of changing their diet and lifestyle. Since religion is someone’s identity too, it would be impossible to punish a business owner for being who they are. Business owners put their values into their business. Their religious identity goes alongside their work. They pour their lives and heart into their business. Therefore, someone’s identity is a sin to them and there’s nothing wrong with the owner expressing it that way. Rejecting service to people who don’t believe the same thing they do is what’s best for the business. It would be getting rid of people who don’t share the values of the business. If someone doesn’t agree with the values, they should find business elsewhere. It doesn’t warrant a civil case against the owner.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The owner gets to decide according to their belief whether they’ll consider someone’s identity a sin or not. [Rejecting P2] Denying service to people because of their identity would support the business’ values.