Five Disgraced Business Owners Who Le...

Five Disgraced Business Owners Who Learned That Homophobia Just Doesn't Sell

There are 54 comments on the Queerty story from Aug 1, 2014, titled Five Disgraced Business Owners Who Learned That Homophobia Just Doesn't Sell. In it, Queerty reports that:

Homophobia. Turns out it's just not good for business. Simply ask Aaron and Melissa Klein , the disgraced Oregon bakers who refused to make two lesbians a wedding cake, calling them an "abomination unto the Lord" and, as a result of all the bad PR they received, were forced to close up shop.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Queerty.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Cake closed

Beverly, MA

#1 Aug 1, 2014
Bottom line, all the customers asked for was a wedding cake. And instead they got some unsolicited religious advice.

Should have stuck to baking and held back on the unsolicited advice.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3 Aug 2, 2014
You WILL make rainbow cupcakes.
You WILL work at gay weddings.
You WILL rent rooms to gay couples.
You WILL make them rainbow pancakes for breakfast.
You WILL photograph a gay wedding.
You WILL NOT donate to causes that support traditional marriage.
You WILL NOT be protected by the 1st amendment.
You WILL NOT respect your religion.

Sieg heil!
Gremlin

Louisville, KY

#4 Aug 2, 2014
Wondering wrote:
You WILL make rainbow cupcakes.
You WILL work at gay weddings.
You WILL rent rooms to gay couples.
You WILL make them rainbow pancakes for breakfast.
You WILL photograph a gay wedding.
You WILL NOT donate to causes that support traditional marriage.
You WILL NOT be protected by the 1st amendment.
You WILL NOT respect your religion.
Sieg heil!
YOU WILL NOT treat people like second class citizens....if prejudiced business owners would get this through their heads, they would have no lawsuits or bad publicity.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5 Aug 2, 2014
Gremlin wrote:
<quoted text>YOU WILL NOT treat people like second class citizens....if prejudiced business owners would get this through their heads, they would have no lawsuits or bad publicity.
I think they should serve anyone, that said, I support their choice.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#7 Aug 2, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me ask you something.
Since these people claim the right not to serve certain people because of their Christian beliefs, then do you believe that they have the right to refuse to serve non-Christians because non-Christians refuse to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ ? That IS the central teaching of Christianity, so shouldn't they be offended if non-Christians, by definition, refuse to believe that central Truth ?
YES or NO ?
(btw, non-Christians include, but are not limited to: Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, Hindu Americans, Buddhist Americans, and others)
I think they have the right to refuse service to anyone, myself included, for any reason.
They are only hurting their own business and the 'free' market will punish them, or not.
For me, it isn't about religion, it's about freedom of choice. If someone doesn't want to serve me because I'm wearing an Obama t-shirt, I'll go somewhere else. I might call him an a-hole but I wouldn't sue him.
Willinrichland

United States

#9 Aug 30, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, the law says differently. We as a society decided half a century ago that we don't want to live like that.
When a black family sits down in a restaurant for a meal, the staff cannot refuse to serve them simply because of their race.
If a Hasidic Jew gets on a Greyhound bus to travel to another city, the bus driver cannot refuse him a seat on the bus simply because he is a Jew.
There was a time when people could do that, and Americans decided that is not the society we want to live in.
And federal and state laws reflect that decision.
The Constitution still guarantees our freedom of religion. Homosexual conduct is still an abomination. People of faith can continue to follow their faith regardless of what some liberal judge may claim. Claims that homosexual conduct is normal are lies spread by Satan and his followers.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10 Aug 30, 2014
Wondering wrote:
You WILL make rainbow cupcakes.
You WILL work at gay weddings.
You WILL rent rooms to gay couples.
You WILL make them rainbow pancakes for breakfast.
You WILL photograph a gay wedding.
You WILL NOT donate to causes that support traditional marriage.
You WILL NOT be protected by the 1st amendment.
You WILL NOT respect your religion.
Sieg heil!
So, Nazi's fight illegal discrimination in public accommodations? That's a new one.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#11 Aug 30, 2014
Willinrichland wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution still guarantees our freedom of religion. Homosexual conduct is still an abomination.......
It also protects citizens from people like you forcing your religious views on others. If you open a public accommodation, you need to be prepared to accommodate the public. And that includes Muslims, Black Americans, gay folks, and Christians, among a thousand other groups.

If you can't do that, fine another line of work.

It's pretty simple.

And since when is marriage an "abomination"? That is the gay behavior at the root of this issue.
Tea Bag Residue Cleanup

Philadelphia, PA

#12 Aug 30, 2014
I think they have the right to refuse service to anyone, myself included, for any reason."

You're ignorant and incorrect.

Of course you think state AGs should be busy enforcing anti sodomy laws still on the books even though they've been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

You're sick.

“True Blue”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#13 Aug 30, 2014
Just goes to show that the customer IS always right.

“True Blue”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#14 Aug 30, 2014
Willinrichland wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution still guarantees our freedom of religion. Homosexual conduct is still an abomination. People of faith can continue to follow their faith regardless of what some liberal judge may claim. Claims that homosexual conduct is normal are lies spread by Satan and his followers.
You're the abomination, funny-mentalist.
Willinseartle

Richland, WA

#16 Sep 5, 2014
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
It also protects citizens from people like you forcing your religious views on others. If you open a public accommodation, you need to be prepared to accommodate the public. And that includes Muslims, Black Americans, gay folks, and Christians, among a thousand other groups.
If you can't do that, fine another line of work.
It's pretty simple.
And since when is marriage an "abomination"? That is the gay behavior at the root of this issue.
Our republic guarantees the individual citizen the right to practice their religion in peace. The federal government does not have the power to make immoral, unnatural, deviant behavior normal. Government does not have the power to force citizens to accept homosexual marriage. The queer lobby is way too powerful.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#17 Sep 6, 2014
Willinseartle wrote:
<quoted text>
Our republic guarantees the individual citizen the right to practice their religion in peace.......
Yes, of course, but you are not allowed to force your religious beliefs on others who do not share them.

And if you run a public accommodation and use your religious belief to deny service to some of that public, expect backlash.

What happens when a business owner who belies that God separated the races for a reason refuses to bake a cake for an interracial couple? Same thing that happens when the refuse to accommodate a gay couple.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#18 Sep 6, 2014
Quest wrote:
What happens when a business owner who belies that God separated the races for a reason refuses to bake a cake for an interracial couple? Same thing that happens when the refuse to accommodate a gay couple.
Same thing, find a business that will serve you. You get your cake, the business loses customers.
Sounds like the way it should be.
JonW

Richland, WA

#19 Sep 7, 2014
Queers claimed to want tolerance. Most Americans went along only to have their beliefs to be attacked by the gay lobby. People have the right to do and to think as they want. This must extend to people who, while willing to tolerate homosexuals, do not believe in gay marriage.
DanS

Tacoma, WA

#20 Oct 2, 2014
You demand that we tolerate your belief in homosexual marriage, yet refuse to allow us to believe otherwise. Toleration ended the moment the gay lobby started finding ultra liberal federal judges to go against the will of the people. Every single time that gay marriage has been put to a vote, the people have said no. Private businesses should be able to refuse to participate in a ceremony that violates their religious convictions. Arleen's Flowers did not refuse to sell flowers to the queers, they just refused to participate in the ceremony.
RichardinRichlan d

Kent, WA

#21 Oct 3, 2014
The only disgraced people are the poor lost souls who think sodomy with a same sex fellow deviant is in any way normal. It is not. Hats off to the business owners brave enough to stand up to the pro homosexual lobby.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#22 Oct 3, 2014
Willinseartle wrote:
<quoted text>
Our republic guarantees the individual citizen the right to practice their religion in peace. The federal government does not have the power to make immoral, unnatural, deviant behavior normal. Government does not have the power to force citizens to accept homosexual marriage. The queer lobby is way too powerful.
You probably weren't born yet when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed into law by the Congress:
**********
The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title II - Public Accommodation
http://www.citizensource.com/History/20thCen/...
**********
Public accommodation is set into motion when a business owner purchases a business license and posts it within view of the cash register as required by law; so there is no doubt or wiggle room for people to contest it
.
Obey the law; you win
.
Break the law; you lose
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#23 Oct 3, 2014
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
1. You probably weren't born yet when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed into law by the Congress:
**********
2. The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title II - Public Accommodation
http://www.citizensource.com/History/20thCen/...
1. Irrelevant.
2. Here's what it says:
"All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin." Do you see anything thing in there about gays? gay wedding cakes? gay wedding receptions? Would you help me find it, I can't.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#24 Oct 3, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Irrelevant.
2. Here's what it says:
"All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin." Do you see anything thing in there about gays? gay wedding cakes? gay wedding receptions? Would you help me find it, I can't.
Clue: discrimination on grounds of religion
.
The religious people are losing their cases based on grounds of segregation and religious discrimination
.
Here is where GAYS enter the picture:
**********
SEC. 201.(a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
http://www.citizensource.com/History/20thCen/...
**********
.
So if this is inconvenient to fundies who bake cakes; why don't they stop wasting time picking on GAYS and concentrate on getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act Repealed?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Body found along railroad tracks near Tri-Cities (Dec '09) Aug 14 Dot 44
News Jehovaha s Witness conventions planned in July ... Jul '16 Anchor07 1
News New study finds global warming, melting sea ice... (Sep '14) Jul '16 IB DaMann 12
Anyone wanna talk? Mar '16 CHICKEN PEOPLES 1
News Kamiakin basketball player continues family tra... (Feb '16) Feb '16 Ray Stein 1
News 51 new citizens naturalized in Richland Tuesday (Nov '15) Nov '15 tnmiller 1
News Judge rules against florist who didn't want to ... (Jan '15) Nov '15 TomInElPaso 217

Richland Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richland Mortgages