Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Jun 6, 2013 Full story: Denver Post 6,073

Engaged gay couple Dave Mullins, second from left, and Charlie Craig, left, were joined by a small group of supporters in Lakewood on Aug. 4, 2012 to protest and boycott the Masterpiece Cakeshop at 3355 S. Wadsworth Blvd. The couple went to the cake shop, and the owner turned the couple away saying he would not make them a rainbow-themed wedding ... (more)

Full Story

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#338 Dec 16, 2013
Christsharian Law wrote:
<quoted text>You have borne false witness by exactly reversing the reality:

I have not kicked xstain mullahs out of my business, nor worked for laws preventing them from adopting or marrying, nor tried to remove their employment protections.

Our "religious" freaks have done all this and worse regarding glbt people. You have a problem with projection, with basic thinking, with science, with a non theocracy, and we _know_ from the record who the bigots are.

So you may stop being a pretend victim, you lying, disgusting, christer idiot.
I'm not the victim... The baker is, apparently by someone as hate and vindictive as you are.

Thank God our Constitution protects American individuals from sad angry people like you. Yet, I'll continue to pray for you.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#339 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
What because you say it? http://www.710knus.com/kelleyandcompany.aspx
It’s still going and will continue because the 1st Amendment of our Constitution protects him
Your link has nothing on this subject and sorry, but no judge has yet to find discriminatory practices in contradiction to the law are a 1st Amendment right. NONE.
Respect71 wrote:
And he has the right to bake cakes for ONLY man-woman marriages... and calling me names, doesn’t change that fact.
Apparently he doesn't have such a right, because if he had, he wouldn't have been found guilty of discrimination. EVERYBODY who goes into his shop has the same right to his services, including wedding cakes, free from suspect classification and discriminatory practices.
Respect71 wrote:
You need to learn focus... You are all over the board.
Remember, I am replying to what YOU are saying, if I am all over the map, you've been leading the way. If you hadn't said that his not going to jail was a sign that he had done nothing wrong, you would have never learned that jail time wasn't even a possibility for what he did do wrong.
Respect71 wrote:
You need to learn focus... You are all over the board.
I am focused on what you have been saying, your attention span isn't my fault.
Respect71 wrote:
So now you start to show your colors.
I thought I had made it fairly clear from the beginning that while he has a right to his choice of beliefs, that doesn't mean I have to be a fan of them.
Respect71 wrote:
If he is exercising his right to his religion, how is he VIOLATING their rights to a cake when there are hundreds of other places they can go?
Denver could have the greatest population density of wedding cake bakeries on the planet, but it does not matter, they exercised their right to enter his business for his services, what anyone else would and would not do for this couple does not matter. he violated their right to HIS services, just because they got the cake someplace else does not excuse his actions.
Respect71 wrote:
Especially given that a majority of Christians believe the behavior of homosexuality is sin.
Their problem, not ours, we have every right to be here, whether you choose to believe God approves or not.
Respect71 wrote:
Let’s deal with what is, because now it seems to be you who is irrational.
That is what it is. If you are going to say that business owners have a right to practice discrimination based on what they preach, you got to say just how far the right to blame God for your actions gets to go. Do you only get to freely exercise your beliefs on the gay folk, or is anyone fair game, to hell with all suspect classifications?
Respect71 wrote:
No, he is an individual of these United States exercising his 1st Amendment rights.
He has a right to his beliefs, not his actions. That is why the Judge found him guilty.
Christsharian Law

Philadelphia, PA

#340 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not the victim... The baker is, apparently by someone as hate and vindictive as you are.
Thank God our Constitution protects American individuals from sad angry people like you. Yet, I'll continue to pray for you.
Hey cretin fer xrist, you didn't apologize for your latest episode of lying. You merely tried to deflect from it.

I haven't tossed fundies out of my business. That's the fundies do that sort of thing. Aong with the other pogroms they seek in this non theocracy.

You made not merely a false claim, but one steeped in clinical denial.

While you're doing all of the prayin' fer people's souls - people whose beliefs don't line up with your sick, anti rational fundie ones - I suggest you seek help for your multiple problems, trash.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#341 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but you’ll need to cite your source for that claim. You may need to research Chick-fill-a or hobby lobby.
I'm unsure what Chick-fil-A did but make a public statement about their beliefs/policy. Hobby lobby however is breaking the law by not giving their workers the healthcare they are entitled to and taking away their religious beliefs. This is going to the supreme court I believe.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#342 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I will ask again, is it the same when a public school teacher refuses to read books about gay parents to 1st graders? They can go be teachers somewhere else?
No, they shouldn't be teachers at all. We shouldn't allow bigotry in the US.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#343 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow.
Really? Your dad loved your mom EXACTLY the same as a gay man loves another gay man? You are being intellectually dishonest.
Umm, no I'm not, you are being close minded. Yes a gay man loves another gay man EXACTLY the same. When you can wrap your head around this, maybe you will understand why I fight for the rights of gays. What makes you think this isn't possible? I'm sure you see plenty of opposite sex relationships where you have no freaking clue why one person loves another, but they do. Just because you can't understand it doesn't make it any less real for them.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#344 Dec 16, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage as defined by our state Constitution is a solid proven benefit to society as a whole, and gays having civil unions is a great benefit as they now have the SAME benfits as recognized by the State. This is a very good thing and it by no means makes then 2nd class.
We already struck down 'separate but equal' as unconstitutional.

Also, what benefit to society does any marriage give? It is just about the individuals. It makes no difference whether 100% are married or none. If you are thinking about kids, that can be done without marriage, as is the case in over 50% of births these days.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#345 Dec 18, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Your link has nothing on this subject and sorry, but no judge has yet to find discriminatory practices in contradiction to the law are a 1st Amendment right. NONE. <quoted text>Apparently he doesn't have such a right, because if he had, he wouldn't have been found guilty of discrimination. EVERYBODY who goes into his shop has the same right to his services, including wedding cakes, free from suspect classification and discriminatory practices.
<quoted text>Remember, I am replying to what YOU are saying, if I am all over the map, you've been leading the way. If you hadn't said that his not going to jail was a sign that he had done nothing wrong, you would have never learned that jail time wasn't even a possibility for what he did do wrong.
<quoted text>I am focused on what you have been saying, your attention span isn't my fault.
<quoted text>I thought I had made it fairly clear from the beginning that while he has a right to his choice of beliefs, that doesn't mean I have to be a fan of them.
<quoted text>Denver could have the greatest population density of wedding cake bakeries on the planet, but it does not matter, they exercised their right to enter his business for his services, what anyone else would and would not do for this couple does not matter. he violated their right to HIS services, just because they got the cake someplace else does not excuse his actions.
<quoted text>Their problem, not ours, we have every right to be here, whether you choose to believe God approves or not.
<quoted text>That is what it is. If you are going to say that business owners have a right to practice discrimination based on what they preach, you got to say just how far the right to blame God for your actions gets to go. Do you only get to freely exercise your beliefs on the gay folk, or is anyone fair game, to hell with all suspect classifications?
<quoted text>He has a right to his beliefs, not his actions. That is why the Judge found him guilty.
http://www.710knus.com/PhotoPages/Photos.aspx...

The baker is protected by the 1st Amendment and your claim that the gay couple had rights violated is intellectually dishonest.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#346 Dec 18, 2013
Christsharian Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey cretin fer xrist, you didn't apologize for your latest episode of lying. You merely tried to deflect from it.
I haven't tossed fundies out of my business. That's the fundies do that sort of thing. Aong with the other pogroms they seek in this non theocracy.
You made not merely a false claim, but one steeped in clinical denial.
While you're doing all of the prayin' fer people's souls - people whose beliefs don't line up with your sick, anti rational fundie ones - I suggest you seek help for your multiple problems, trash.
I especially pray for people whose hearts are so full of hate and distain for others. You are in desperate need of prayer.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#347 Dec 18, 2013
southern alien wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm, no I'm not, you are being close minded. Yes a gay man loves another gay man EXACTLY the same. When you can wrap your head around this, maybe you will understand why I fight for the rights of gays. What makes you think this isn't possible? I'm sure you see plenty of opposite sex relationships where you have no freaking clue why one person loves another, but they do. Just because you can't understand it doesn't make it any less real for them.
“Umm, no I'm not, you are being close minded. Yes a gay man loves another gay man EXACTLY the same.” WHAT?! Do you believe men and women are the same?! Unfortunately, the facts are that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a man to love another man the SAME as a man loves another woman. Aside from the drastic modifications of the act of physical love, the mental and emotional parts of a gay relationship are drastically modified as well…
“When you can wrap your head around this, maybe you will understand why I fight for the rights of gays.” I fight for American’s rights! No one is greater or lesser than the other.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#348 Dec 18, 2013
southern alien wrote:
<quoted text>
We already struck down 'separate but equal' as unconstitutional.
Also, what benefit to society does any marriage give? It is just about the individuals. It makes no difference whether 100% are married or none. If you are thinking about kids, that can be done without marriage, as is the case in over 50% of births these days.
“We already struck down 'separate but equal' as unconstitutional.” Sorry but in Colorado it’s not 'separate but equal' it’s different, logical, fair, and absolutely Constitutional.

“Also, what benefit to society does any marriage give?” Societies thrive where traditional families thrive. This has been shown throughout history.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#349 Dec 18, 2013
southern alien wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm unsure what Chick-fil-A did but make a public statement about their beliefs/policy. Hobby lobby however is breaking the law by not giving their workers the healthcare they are entitled to and taking away their religious beliefs. This is going to the supreme court I believe.
The law is unconstitutional because it FORCES the company to pay and provide for service that goes against their belief.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#350 Dec 18, 2013
southern alien wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they shouldn't be teachers at all. We shouldn't allow bigotry in the US.
Yet you are being bigoted towards the Christian teacher. The 1st amendment protects that teacher as well as the baker.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#351 Dec 18, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
http://www.710knus.com/PhotoPages/Photos.aspx...
The baker is protected by the 1st Amendment and your claim that the gay couple had rights violated is intellectually dishonest.
Let me make this simple for your obviously simple mind. The judge ruled there is no 1st Amendment protection to practice what you preach, when what you practice is illegal; that is why he was found guilty of violating the couple's rights to his services. He has not appealed and the Judge's ruling has not been stayed. I have the law and the Judge's ruling on my side, you have a link proving nothing.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#352 Dec 18, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
The law is unconstitutional because it FORCES the company to pay and provide for service that goes against their belief.
The right to one's religious beliefs/practices is NOT ABSOLUTE and although the power of the government to limit, regulate or prohibit is limited to instances where the government has a compelling interest being served by their actions, the government can and has constitutionally limited, regulated and/or prohibited any number of beliefs/practices.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#353 Dec 18, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Let me make this simple for your obviously simple mind. The judge ruled there is no 1st Amendment protection to practice what you preach, when what you practice is illegal; that is why he was found guilty of violating the couple's rights to his services. He has not appealed and the Judge's ruling has not been stayed. I have the law and the Judge's ruling on my side, you have a link proving nothing.
“Let me make this simple for your obviously simple mind. The judge ruled there is no 1st Amendment protection to practice what you preach, when what you practice is illegal;” A civil Judge...

“that is why he was found guilty of violating the couple's rights to his services. He has not appealed and the Judge's ruling has not been stayed. I have the law and the Judge's ruling on my side, you have a link proving nothing.” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#354 Dec 18, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>The right to one's religious beliefs/practices is NOT ABSOLUTE and although the power of the government to limit, regulate or prohibit is limited to instances where the government has a compelling interest being served by their actions, the government can and has constitutionally limited, regulated and/or prohibited any number of beliefs/practices.
I agree, and if ALL bakers were refusing to serve gays for wedding cakes then it seriously needs to be looked at... But this is ONE baker in all of Colorado. That being said where does it state gay couples have the RIGHT to purchase a wedding cake from a Christian man who believes these cakes are for man and wife?

From where I sit you and your gay couple are being vindictive, judgmental and bigoted towards this baker, all the things you say you hate.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#355 Dec 18, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
A civil Judge...
And you were expecting? It is a civil case and not a criminal one. Sheesh.
Respect71 wrote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
The Constitution does say that, but it isn't an absolute right, now is it?

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#356 Dec 18, 2013
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, and if ALL bakers were refusing to serve gays for wedding cakes then it seriously needs to be looked at... But this is ONE baker in all of Colorado. That being said where does it state gay couples have the RIGHT to purchase a wedding cake from a Christian man who believes these cakes are for man and wife?
From where I sit you and your gay couple are being vindictive, judgmental and bigoted towards this baker, all the things you say you hate.
The LAW is being judgmental of his bad acts, it's what it is there for. He doesn't get a free pass simply because he's the only fool fool enough to break the law.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#357 Dec 19, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>And you were expecting? It is a civil case and not a criminal one. Sheesh. <quoted text>The Constitution does say that, but it isn't an absolute right, now is it?
Really? Because the way you and the others on this thread write, make it seem like he’s a criminal.
The Judgment, in this case, goes against the 1st Amendment.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Denver Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Republicans the party of LIARS (Dec '11) 5 min uSUCK 14,374
Legit pain n anxiety meds 15 hr Reyna lokita 2
Denver tar 15 hr Reyna lokita 4
last post wins! (Feb '11) Wed Sniper II 24,872
Gay/Bi teens in/near Denver, Colorado Tue zombiegentelman 22
Housewife convicted of frying husband (Mar '07) Tue Extrollanator- 68
Which age group watches Johnny Test (Mar '11) Tue Ayana12513 15
Denver Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Denver People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Denver News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Denver

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:06 pm PST

Bleacher Report 3:06PM
Peyton: I Plan on Being Back in 2015
NBC Sports 9:56 PM
Peyton Manning fully participates in practice
Bleacher Report12:18 AM
How Ronnie Hillman Can Spark Broncos Offense Heading into Playoffs
Bleacher Report 2:15 AM
Should New England Patriots Rest Key Starters in Week 17?
Bleacher Report 7:00 AM
Updated 2014 Analysis for Final Week of Season