Among the many controversial cases the Supreme Court will take on in the term beginning October 2, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Division, Charlie Craig, and David Mullins will particularly attract much public attention. The case began in 2012 when Charlie Craig and David Mullins started planning for their wedding reception in Colorado. As the couple stepped into Masterpiece Cakeshop to buy a wedding cake, they promptly realized that they were not warmly welcomed here as Jack Phillips, owner of the bakery stated that “it was his standard business practice not to provide cakes for same-sex wedding[s].”

The couple filed discrimination charges afterwards, claiming that Mr Phillips had violated their civil rights in discriminating them based on their sexual orientation. On the other hand, Jack Phillips defended his action by laying claims on religious freedom, arguing that he reserved the right to refuse service to the couple if doing so would violate his Christian faith. Despite their opposite positions, the two sides both agreed that their case signifies more than just a wedding cake. “This has always been about more than a cake,” Mr Mullins – one of the two fiancés said. “Businesses should not be allowed to violate the law and discriminate against us because of who we are and who we love.”

Yet the defendant also had his own reasoning: “It’s more than just a cake. It’s a piece of art in so many ways.” shared Mr Phillips, emotionally. “I’m being forced to use my creativity, my talents and my art for an event – a significant religious event – that violates my religious faith.”

While many opinions advocating the bakery shop’s refusal to acknowledge the importance of case, trivializing it by stating that the couple could just have gone to another bakery shop for their wedding cake (which they did), I set out to argue for the opposite. Both arguments from the two sides and the public attention it attracts have clearly proved that Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Division, Charlie Craig, and David Mullins will have far-reaching implications, not only on gay rights but also on various civil rights issue in the 21st century. If the Supreme Court chooses to rule in favor of the bakery shop, its ruling will have a lasting, wide-range negative impact on gay rights, essentially allowing for public discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.

Granted that the case in question revolves around a wedding cake, yet it will undoubtedly become the general premise on which nation-wide courts base their ruling. Asserting that Mr Phillips can constitutionally refuse service to a gay couple is fundamentally turning green light to other sexuality-based discriminatory acts in public areas, ranging from basic service to job recruitment.

Once a baker is authorized to make business decisions based on his religious beliefs, there is no guarantee that other employers would rely on the same argument to choose their prospective employees, thus denying opportunities to the vast majority of the LGBT community. Furthermore, far beyond the question of gay rights lays the contention between private, personal beliefs and public obligations. If Masterpiece Cakeshop can refuse to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, what is going to stop other practice from refusing basic public service to their clients on the grounds of religious violation?

I personally believe that if Masterpiece Cakeshop wins at the Supreme Court, this will be a contradictory decision to Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark case in 2015 granting legal rights to same-sex marriage. A rule in favor of explicit discrimination in the name of religious freedom would significantly disparage the value and gravity of gay marriage, implying that such practice is not worthy of legal protection. Regardless of its outcome, it is undeniable that Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Division, Charlie Craig, and David Mullins will go down as one of the most important landmark cases surrounding gay rights.