Colo. gay discrimination alleged over...

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

There are 36244 comments on the Denver Post story from Jun 6, 2013, titled Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake. In it, Denver Post reports that:

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)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Denver Post.

d pantz

United States

#505 Jan 1, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>And it's your right to confuse a suspension with being fired.
Answer this.
Why are you opposing the will of the people who made it a crime for the baker to do what he did?
Would you claim religious freedom means whites only water fountains and rest rooms?
Why do fundamentalists whine about the war on Christmas and then try to use religious freedom to circumvent the law?
I already explained, when the will of the people imposes on your god given rights, the law is unconstitutional.
No I've never heard of any religious group that believes you should segregate bathrooms or you are a sinner. That's a stretch.
Go ask the fundamentalists why they whine, I don't care .

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#506 Jan 1, 2014
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> regardless of all the pointless bible quotes you just posted, ordained ministers do marry people and those marriages are recognized by the government. That's a public service. Are you trying to say it isn't and point to some religious babble as proof?
I am saying it isn't and so are 32 States that BAN SMM you dolt!

No religious babble as proof of that is needed.

The fact remains you are perfectly happy when civil laws punish the religious as is the case in Indiana. Pull whatever religious babble or mental masturbation you want from that mess to justify the hypocrisy I have shown you demonstrate.

As I predicted 2014 is going to be fun to witness.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#507 Jan 1, 2014
SSM not SMM

my bad
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#508 Jan 1, 2014
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> sorry but choosing to run a privately owned business based on your personal beliefs ( a terrible business decision anyway, ask A&E) is not "imposing" anything on any free society. The government shouldn't have anything to do with it.
The laws exist despite your cretinous claims.

I know, I know, you christianist liers fer jeesus are still upset that, by the exact same sorts of reasoning, you can't toss black people out of your private businesses.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#509 Jan 1, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
Yet the government perpetuates discrimination with regulations. The terms and conditions aren’t the SAME.
Wrong answer, the government prohibits discrimination, regardless of the basis for it, in places of public accommodation. It simply does not and should no matter where this illegal act is coming from, it is still an illegal act. God can be his motive, but not his excuse. Shopping while homosexual was settled law ages ago, the baker just found him a publicity worthy method of breaking it.
Respect71 wrote:
Not selling a wedding cake to a gay couple based on religious belief versus political correctness is appropriate.
The reality is that whether you like it or not, sometimes political correctness has to trump religious belief. There are some people who have some seriously ugly and potentially dangerous for others religious beliefs out there. They have a right to be out there, but if you are going to be sharing them with others in the public square, there are limits. Discriminating against folk for being homosexual and/or any other suspect classification, one of those limits, just as it is for everyone else. Sorry, God can forgive what he did, not excuse it in the eyes of the law.
Respect71 wrote:
Only special rights for gay pride parades. The 1st Amendment applies to ALL Americans.
What special rights would those be? And please get a new bumper sticker slogan.
Respect71 wrote:
Now is because of “moral disapproval”? So you are in favor of government removing his rights because you dislike his “moral disapproval” of the gay relationship in favor of your “moral disapproval” of his actions.
If our behavior is legal, consensual, of right mind and appropriate to the present circumstance, your right of disapproval of our custom is limited when it comes to your suspect classification of others.
Respect71 wrote:
Who are you to say a wedding cake is no religious service?
Because he is not providing his services only to those who share his religious beliefs. did he provide them to opposite sex couples not having God bless their marriage? To couples of another faith? He cannot selectively uphold his religious faith. If he's not refusing his services every time the couple does not meet his faith's requirements for the rite, he's got no claim of religious interference now.
Respect71 wrote:
Yes it does, especially in support of your own “moral disapproval”.
You can assert that all you want, but no such right exists and no such right will be recognized in the foreseeable future. This is a case that is seventeen years out of synch with the reality of settled Colorado law and the civil rights of gay folk to be gay folk. You may not be old enough to remember Amendment 2, but some of us are. This baker is an anachronism not a martyr.
Respect71 wrote:
You are confusing a public place of worship with a private place of business.
Places of worship are open to the public on the worshipers terms, not even Catholics have a legal right to be in a Catholic Church. Places of business are open to the public on the government's terms. Still confusing the two as being somehow similarly situated?
Respect71 wrote:
The reality is that not all Americans support and believe in personally or in government endorsed “gay marriage”, and since a wedding cake is a symbol of marriage a baker is within his rights based on our 1st Amendment. No law will nor should attempt to change that fact.
No kidding, it's not like those of you morally opposed are shy about your issues. He wasn't asked for his blessing, he was asked for his services. He broke a constitutionally valid law with no provision for God to bless violating it. He wants a special right which no one deserves.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#510 Jan 1, 2014
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> interesting...is the definition of discrimination defined within the statute?
The age of the earth? I suppose you "know" what it is....public indecency and since you bring it back up, no I can't get it out of my mind. I can't wait until there is a straight pride parade
Hey mentally ill freak:

The state law says there is no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, so yes, you stupid filth.

Rational people know the earth is billions of years old, not thousands. Buybull bangers crazily claim this is not known. They're literally insane.

You brought up the issue of nudity, not I. That's because you have a classic closet case's obsession with (male) homosexuality.

Heterosexuals get plenty explicit in public and in the media. Go rail about heterosexuality.

Carnival, Mardi Gras and the Miss America Parade (in A.C.) come close to gay pride parades, but str8 people don't need a political movement or pride parades because no one said that str8 people can't marry, adopt, serve openly, be protected from arbitrary firing.

You have a very sick, illogical, anti rational, brainwashed mind, since all of this is perfectly obvious. You're a disgusting bigot with sexual problems is all.
sally

Denver, CO

#511 Jan 1, 2014
It seems to me since most people have approved gay marriage that gays have taken the same position that all of their previous detractors had. Extreme prejudice. Extreme hatred to anyone who doesn't agree with them. Lots of religious people are guaranteed their beliefs per the constitution. Just because yours are new doesn't make them better. This guy doesn't deserve this anymore than you did one to two years ago. I am old and do not have a car, but if I did I would definitely shop at this bakery.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#512 Jan 1, 2014
sally wrote:
It seems to me since most people have approved gay marriage that gays have taken the same position that all of their previous detractors had. Extreme prejudice.
You're senile, not old. No one said these fake christianist homophobes can't marry, adopt, serve openly, be protected from arbitrary firing. You must be sick in some way to not understand the difference.

But then you'd probably go out of your way to patronize a bakery which would discriminate on the basis of race, too.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#513 Jan 2, 2014
Christians In Name Only wrote:
<quoted text>
This also means that xstain fundie theocrats and bigots don't get to impose their backwards superstitions on secular society. It just means the government cannot stop you from hypocritically following the buybull, as you do.
Unless you think non fundie xstain owned businesses of all kinds and other faiths, including non fundie Christians, can refuse to serve freaky, ignorant evilgleicals on the basis of "religious beliefs."
“This also means that xstain fundie theocrats and bigots don't get to impose their backwards superstitions on secular society. It just means the government cannot stop you from hypocritically following the buybull, as you do.

Unless you think non fundie xstain owned businesses of all kinds and other faiths, including non fundie Christians, can refuse to serve freaky, ignorant evilgleicals on the basis of "religious beliefs."” Says the hatful and disrespectful bigot.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#514 Jan 2, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>
“Wrong answer, the government prohibits discrimination, regardless of the basis for it, in places of public accommodation.” Regulation is discrimination.
“ It simply does not and should no matter where this illegal act is coming from, it is still an illegal act. God can be his motive, but not his excuse.” Based on your discriminatory opinion, same as the judge in this case.

“The reality is that whether you like it or not, sometimes political correctness has to trump religious belief.” Not true, based on the 1st Amendment of our Constitution. Political correctness is a liberal concept to discriminate and impose beliefs and ideals upon others with zero to very little consequence to the discriminator.

“There are some people who have some seriously ugly and potentially dangerous for others religious beliefs out there. They have a right to be out there, but if you are going to be sharing them with others in the public square, there are limits.” Agreed, however you have yet to show that not selling a wedding cake to a gay couple is “seriously ugly and potentially dangerous”.
“Discriminating against folk for being homosexual and/or any other suspect classification, one of those limits, just as it is for everyone else. Sorry, God can forgive what he did, not excuse it in the eyes of the law.”
“What special rights would those be? And please get a new bumper sticker slogan.” The allowance and exemption of indecency laws for gay pride events.
“If our behavior is legal, consensual, of right mind and appropriate to the present circumstance, your right of disapproval of our custom is limited when it comes to your suspect classification of others.” No government, law or person can limit “disapproval”.
“Because he is not providing his services only to those who share his religious beliefs. did he provide them to opposite sex couples not having God bless their marriage? To couples of another faith? He cannot selectively uphold his religious faith. If he's not refusing his services every time the couple does not meet his faith's requirements for the rite, he's got no claim of religious interference now.” Because of the 1st Amendment of our Constitution he does.

“You can assert that all you want, but no such right exists and no such right will be recognized in the foreseeable future. This is a case that is seventeen years out of synch with the reality of settled Colorado law and the civil rights of gay folk to be gay folk. You may not be old enough to remember Amendment 2, but some of us are. This baker is an anachronism not a martyr.” He is neither… He is an American.

“Places of worship are open to the public on the worshipers terms, not even Catholics have a legal right to be in a Catholic Church. Places of business are open to the public on the government's terms. Still confusing the two as being somehow similarly situated?” The confusion is on your part… While you’re correct about “Places of worship are open to the public on the worshipers terms” a place of business is the same, open to the public on consumer’s terms. While the government does play a part in regulating for public safety it isn’t their responsibility to force a Christian store owner to sell a wedding cake to gay couples. The store is still a privately owned business and we the people have freedoms (NOT ABSOLUTE).

“No kidding, it's not like those of you morally opposed are shy about your issues. He wasn't asked for his blessing, he was asked for his services. He broke a constitutionally valid law with no provision for God to bless violating it. He wants a special right which no one deserves.” There is nothing SPECIAL about a 1st Amendment right (NOT ABSOLUTE).

Infesting your lack of response to gay pride parades (of which I support because of our Constitution, and morally disapprove) and your dishonesty about them.
Xstain Mullah Fricassee

Philadelphia, PA

#515 Jan 2, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the hatful and disrespectful bigot.
No, cretin, I am not the one saying businesses can refuse to serve fundie xstains or other groups. That is your backwards cohort regarding the exact same laws which, along with religion, protect on the basis of race and veteran's status and disability and gender and sexual orientation.

Also, I never said our insane, xstain mullahs cannot marry, adopt, serve openly, be protected from arbitrary firing.

You seem very confused about what constitutes hateful bigotry and who espouses the hateful bigotry.

Meanwhile, educated people may well revile kkk types and homophobes, the actual bigots. So you can quit your christianist, crocodile tears now.
Xstain Mullah Fricassee

Philadelphia, PA

#516 Jan 2, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Infesting your lack of response to gay pride parades (of which I support because of our Constitution, and morally disapprove) and your dishonesty about them.
Hey homosexually fixated moron, go rail against Carnivale or Mardi Gras or your average night on a college campus anywhere if you want to find the equivalent of a gay pride parade.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#517 Jan 2, 2014
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> everything is genetic. When did you "decide" you were straight? No gay gene? Okay so its a brain issue? That's genetic too. Happy new year!
Pull your head out of your ass and read the post again moron.

Clearly it states if we're to say a belief in God has faults because there is no tangible proof then in turn we can say the same about a gay's claim to be born homosexual is not a choice.

Punk.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#518 Jan 2, 2014
Christians In Name Only wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all, closet case, it's telling where your mind went there. I never brought up such things.
Second of all, of course an all encompassing obsession with railing about (male) homosexuality eight hours a day indicates closet issues. There's no debate about this. The topic touches you deeply...and you have to project that out onto others. It's a well known dynamic, and it's really sick.
Your opinion.

That or some of us really this this baker's case is an obvious illegitimate use of the law and an undue punishment given the "crime".
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#519 Jan 2, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Even in small towns, traffic is often blocked for purposes you have no personal interest in. Having a parade, not a special right, it's limited by permit requirements, but anyone can have one.. Parades are considered for entertainment purposes in NY, ass-less permitted, crotchless, no. PS, the wearing of ass-less chaps, not actually proof that someone is gay, even at a gay parade. We accept and respect the right to the expression of the quirks of our brothers and sisters in the family tree, even if you don't want to. If it's consensual and legal, it's their business and not for us to judge.
<quoted text>What we have handed to us here are our rights. He has been found guilty, ordered to obey the law in the future and to post notice that he will not be breaking it again. Exactly what this couple has sought from him all along, that he not do it to the next couple that walks in. There is still no word whether he is appealing this.
Funny how it is all you gays claim gay "pride" parades don't have nudity and obvious other sickening displays of indecent exposure as well as vulgarity.

You just pushed me into action. Next time I'll just sit on the sidelines, take pics, find the law and take you fruitcakes to court for just that.

You claim it never happens, I found proof it does, show the pictures and 'YouTube' videos of it FROM recent gay "pride" parades then watch as you gays as a whole try to dismiss the FACTS by inferring I search out this proof for some weird belief that I MYSELF am gay and searched out this proof against your claims as a means of personal satisfaction.

Makes about as much sense as claiming the prosecutor who handles pedophelia cases did so so he or she could gain access to child porn.

Your logic is so messed up it's laughable.

And you accept the quirks in your brethren to wear assless chaps in public.

Yet you won't allow a God damned baker to follow HIS belief system.

That smells of special interest to me queer. You skewed fool. I'd shoot some bad mojo your way had nature not beat me to it.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#520 Jan 2, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Amazing. First you claim to know better, then you immediately turn around and prove, beyond even a shadow of a doubt, that you can't even fake having a clue. You do realize that Kosher meat markets also won't do an oil bla....bla...bla...ss owners in the public square. They were not their for his blessing or those of God, they were there just like anyone else ordering a wedding cake. We all enjoy the right to be who we are in public and should not have to go through day to day business worrying about being being ambushed by those who take offense at our being who we are, even if they do it as politely as he, by all accounts, did. He violated their civil right, politely, but he still violated it. His only punishment is to not do it again and to post notice to that effect. The baker retains the right to believe that God don't bless same sex marriages and the right to believe he isn't blessing of them either, his customers retain the right of shopping for wedding cakes in his establishment while homosexual.
<quoted text>Lord, have mercy. Oy. Laws against prohibiting discrimination in situations like this, intended to hopefully prevent them from happening in the first place, but designed to address them when they do. They took their right to business elsewhere AND notified the state that their right to that business had been denied to them for no other reason than shopping while gay and being ambushed with a polite God don't bless you and neither will I. The law is intended to be used in this manner. He broke it when he assumed God was going to bless his violation of their civil rights in the eyes of the state constitution. Sorry, but no. He didn't have a "no gay wedding cakes, God says so" sign in the window and couldn't surprise them with one when they came in.
<quoted text>Yet still a violation of their civil rights, nonetheless. Colorado has already been down the road whether us gay folk enjoy equal protection rights. Been there, done that in that fair state. Romer v Evans settled that question in no uncertain terms. The couple's rights are a matter of settled law on the situation, in Colorado, you have the right to shop, even for wedding cakes, regardless of your sexual orientation.
Odd for you to make a lengthy play on words.
I myself sum things up with truth, keep it concise and therefore don't need to ramble like some drunk homeless bum thinking he's running for President.
Discrimination isn't morally right nor should it be legally acceptable. But for this bakers actions in accordance to the degree of actual harm he caused never called for him to face additional penalties other than minor ones. A possible year in jail???
And ytou little flamers have no problem with that yet we put up with your idiotic infractions of the law probably every week. I HAVE seen men walk down the street in San Francisco with no pants on, just some black chaps. I don't see them facing thousands of fines and imprisonment for obvious breaches of the law. I HAVE seen nudity in gay "pride" parades (I saw 2 in truth, full nudity in one) and I WAS was forced into it given they blocked my course of travel. Yet we heterosexuals seem to put up with your shit.
This whole case has been taken out of perspective. In the entire f-ing nation there was one case of a baker not providing a gay "couple" a wedding cake since it went against his religios beliefs.
You gays have no character whatsoever. None. I question now why I supported gay marriage. F-you queers.
As far as your lifestyle friend. It IS sick. Keep it behind closed doors and shut curtains or face the law there too flamer.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#521 Jan 2, 2014
sally wrote:
It seems to me since most people have approved gay marriage that gays have taken the same position that all of their previous detractors had. Extreme prejudice. Extreme hatred to anyone who doesn't agree with them. Lots of religious people are guaranteed their beliefs per the constitution. Just because yours are new doesn't make them better. This guy doesn't deserve this anymore than you did one to two years ago. I am old and do not have a car, but if I did I would definitely shop at this bakery.
You're dead on Sally.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#522 Jan 2, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey mentally ill freak:
The state law says there is no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, so yes, you stupid filth.
Rational people know the earth is billions of years old, not thousands. Buybull bangers crazily claim this is not known. They're literally insane.
You brought up the issue of nudity, not I. That's because you have a classic closet case's obsession with (male) homosexuality.
Heterosexuals get plenty explicit in public and in the media. Go rail about heterosexuality.
Carnival, Mardi Gras and the Miss America Parade (in A.C.) come close to gay pride parades, but str8 people don't need a political movement or pride parades because no one said that str8 people can't marry, adopt, serve openly, be protected from arbitrary firing.
You have a very sick, illogical, anti rational, brainwashed mind, since all of this is perfectly obvious. You're a disgusting bigot with sexual problems is all.
You GO to Mardis Gras moron. It's a destination.

When a bunch of idiots want to sport their Hanes and thongs in public for some gay parade of sexuality and bike around naked to flaunt their sexual motivations in every city they can that in turn is a violation given it is no longer is a destination, it's an intrusion into the places the PUBLIC LIVES you complete idiot.

Might as well block the street you and other gays live and hold signs that tell your sick asses to go back into the musty closet from which you came only to advise if you don't want to see it don't "go there".
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#523 Jan 2, 2014
Christians In Name Only wrote:
<quoted text>
This also means that xstain fundie theocrats and bigots don't get to impose their backwards superstitions on secular society. It just means the government cannot stop you from hypocritically following the buybull, as you do.
Unless you think non fundie xstain owned businesses of all kinds and other faiths, including non fundie Christians, can refuse to serve freaky, ignorant evilgleicals on the basis of "religious beliefs."
Freedom of religion.

It's ingrained in our governmental design. Fact.

No one tells you that you gays cannot believe in Barney the Sausage God so let it go moron.

You have such a hatred of heterosexuals who don't want you and your "boyfriend" to play grabass in front of the little kiddies you've gone blind.

Go get married to some hairy man. Right on. But stop with the idea when you and the others from Gay Porn Union Local 69 think when you walk down the street everyone needs to move to the other side.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#524 Jan 2, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
The laws exist despite your cretinous claims.
I know, I know, you christianist liers fer jeesus are still upset that, by the exact same sorts of reasoning, you can't toss black people out of your private businesses.
The laws were created to uphold the idea no one get discriminated for race, gender, sexual orientation and other aspects.

On that you're right.

Whee you're lost is in terms of perspective Chief. You don't send a 10 year old shoplifter who stole a package of grape BubbleYum to a firing squad and you sure as HELL shouldn't find a baker ouft of business or send him to jail for not allowing two little gay men not to get their precious wedding cake from his shop.

You've been allowed a wide berth as a gay friend and now you homosexuals want to abuse what rights you have gained.

Interesting. And yet you somehow think you're making advances by acting like this towards one baker in a NATION of bakeries who kiss your asses.

Don't jaywalk in front of my car cupcake or I'll lube my undercarriage with some rainbow colored grease.

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
last post wins! (Feb '11) 1 hr _FLATLINE-------- 25,929
Republicans the party of LIARS (Dec '11) 2 hr Dumbo Voters 23,294
News Students hack into school system, change grades (Apr '07) 6 hr Study hard 665
District 2 cops 6 hr Luvblue 6
106.7 kbpi is the worst morning show ever! (Feb '15) 6 hr Cofriends 580
News 'ER' star faces paternity suit (Jul '07) 6 hr Snowbird17 5
Mexicans (Mar '14) 14 hr viva la raza 70
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Denver Mortgages