Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Jun 6, 2013 Full story: Denver Post 5,455

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

#1100 Jan 25, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>The case will continue?
I was wondering why he had a donations thing on his website. Guess he doesn't think he should have to actually PAY HIS OWN WAY in defending HIS RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
LMAO
(doesn't sound to me like he has much faith in his god)
Do you know the economic state of the baker? Do you think he’s rich? Do you think Lawyers are cheep? But because you judge you’re righteous, right?

All Americans have rights and not ALL americans have to agree with you.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1101 Jan 25, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
We have the law and the courts on our side. I'm sorry you are unhappy with the way the USA is set up. Perhaps a theocracy would be more to your liking... say Iran, for instance.
The constitution is clear and it is on ALL side of Americans. All Americans have rights and not ALL americans have to agree with you.

Would your rather go to Iran? Doubt it.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1102 Jan 25, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
The federal government does NOT recognize civil unions. GEEZ! Is that too difficult for you to comprehend? If you think civil unions are so great YOU get one. Of course you don't realize that many States that ban same sex marriage, also ban civil unions, too, do you? So excuse me if I reject your offer of second class status.
You are correct. The Federal government defines marriage as between one-man and one-woman, is that too difficult for you to understand? There has NEVER been such a thing as a “ban” on gay being together only upholding the definition.

Why is it so important to you to redefine marriage?

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1103 Jan 25, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
How would YOU feel if a baker told you "we don't sell cakes to breeders?"
He broke the law.
Do you understand? You don't get to ignore the law and hide behind 'freedom of religion." It doesn't work that way. If you have a problem with the law, work to CHANGE it. Of course you already know there is no chance of that happening, so instead, you come to a gay forum and whine.
I would go to a baker who wanted to do business with me.
The law goes against his 1st Amendment right.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1104 Jan 25, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't start that idiotic assertion, moron, you did.
You said:
"He faces jail and fines, so absolutely his right are violated."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/T9SQIS144...
So, you made an idiotic assertion. This isn't surprising, because you are an idiot.
<quoted text>
Which is to say, separate but equal. Congratulations, even playing semantics, you paint yourself to be an idiot.
<quoted text>
Yeah, here's the deal, moron, the issue is equality under the law, which can absolutely be equal, and already is in 17 states. It soon will be true of 50, and when that happens there will be no impact upon your bigoted life, which is part of the reason it will happen.
<quoted text>
You've never done so with me.
<quoted text>
They were denied service.
Insulting me does not change the FACT. A gay relationship is FASTLY different than a man-woman relationship.“marriage equality” is a myth. The definition of marriage is between a man and a woman... Gays being together is something DIFFERENT. Even if all states redefine marriage to include gays, the fact would remain gay marrying are DIFFERENT from a man and woman marrying.

You believe you’re a complex thinker and I am the simpleton. So tell me... What is the definition of “marriage” as you would like to have it?

It is if it doesn’t harm anyone in any way... Was the gay couple killed? Were they maimed? Were they beaten, robbed and left for dead?

Why are you for government punishing people who don’t agree with you?

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1107 Jan 25, 2014
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>Hey drunk

1. I was merely pointing out you've been anti glbt on every issue, not just on this one as you claim.

2. If you jeesus freek lieers wish to say that lack of employment protections, lack of adoption and marriage rights, forbidding of open military service, etc., are not less than, then you surely won't mind if we impose these "equal" measures on fundie nitwits.

3. It is christianists who don't get special rights to toss others out of christianist owned businesses based on some claimed, hypocritical, cherry picked religious belief. Because we know you freeeks aren't saying a muslim business owner could toss some fundie out onto the street based on religious beliefs.
1. I am not anti anyone.

2. When you can explain what is "equal" about the relationship, then by all means.

3. ALL Americans have rights, even if they don't agree with you.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1108 Jan 25, 2014
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>No, drunk, you wish that were case. It isn't the case as a matter of simple, extant fact in most of the democratic world.

Of course marriage has traditionally been ownership of a woman or many women or many girls by a man. Again, this is simple fact. Like the earth being more than 10000 years old is a simple fact.

Except to brainwashed, anti rational buybull crazies....
Really? Then please define "marriage" as you believe it to be?

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1110 Jan 26, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
Insulting me does not change the FACT.
No, but you are an idiot whether I say so or not, so I might as well say so.
Respect71 wrote:
A gay relationship is FASTLY different than a man-woman relationship.
Did you mean to say vastly?
Respect71 wrote:
“marriage equality” is a myth.
Equal protection of the law for all persons within a state's jurisdiction is not a myth.
Respect71 wrote:
The definition of marriage is between a man and a woman...
At question is whether restricting marriage to opposite sex couples serves a compelling governmental interest. If not, such a restriction is unconstitutional.
Respect71 wrote:
Gays being together is something DIFFERENT. Even if all states redefine marriage to include gays, the fact would remain gay marrying are DIFFERENT from a man and woman marrying.
None of which has any impact upon the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the law. Interracial couples are different from couples of the same race, however the court has held they have the right to marry. That couples are "different" is irrelevant.
Respect71 wrote:
You believe you’re a complex thinker and I am the simpleton.
Actually, I believe you are an idiot. Let's call a spade a spade.
Respect71 wrote:
So tell me... What is the definition of “marriage” as you would like to have it?
Two people with al the legal rights and protections of marriage.
Respect71 wrote:
It is if it doesn’t harm anyone in any way... Was the gay couple killed? Were they maimed? Were they beaten, robbed and left for dead?
What were you attempting to say? It's sentences like this that make me call you an idiot.
Respect71 wrote:
Why are you for government punishing people who don’t agree with you?
Allowing same sex marriage in no way affects, much less punishes, anyone who would not enter into a same sex marriage.

Feel free to offer a way in which it does. However, before you do, make sure that you don't make a fool of yourself by bringing up an anti-discrimination case in a jurisdiction that does not have gay marriage. That would only further make you look like an idiot.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#1111 Jan 26, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is more special than anyone else... Even gays.
The 1st Amendment applies to ALL Americans.
Yes it does. But that DOES NOT mean that religion can be used as an affirmative defense for committing a crime.

As I have tried to help you understand, religious freedom means you are free to practice your beliefs in your own home and in your church or other place of worship. The 2nd Amendment does NOT give you the right to be exempt for the penalties for violating public laws.

You have ridiculed me for bringing up stoning someone in the public square, but if you REALLY think the 2nd Amendment would protect someone from that, give it a try and see how it goes.

These people are picking parts of the Bible to justify their actions. Since that is the case, it's only fair that others point out parts of the Bible these "christians" are trying to ignore. The parable of the Good Samaritan is one example. Then there are the passages where the Bible says we are to obey civil laws.

What does the Bible say about Obeying Authority?
http://www.openbible.info/topics/obeying_auth...

Hebrews 13:17 ESV

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

And since the Book of Romans is often one of the Books these people use to discriminate against gays and lesbians, just for fun let's look at what it says.

Romans 13:1-5 ESV

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

IMO if they are going to use Romans as their reason to disobey civil laws, they aren't following the teachings they claim to follow.

Just saying.
d pantz

United States

#1112 Jan 26, 2014
All they really should have said is that they only specialize in making a certain kind of cake and their services are limited to those , period. Doesn't have anything to do with race or sexual preference its just what they do. BTW the bible is a book that contradicts the s**t out of itself. Any reasonable person thinks its silly to quote it trying to a case either way...
d pantz

United States

#1113 Jan 26, 2014
Though it is ironic we now have gay bible thumpers too. Hilarious actually.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#1114 Jan 26, 2014
d pantz wrote:
All they really should have said is that they only specialize in making a certain kind of cake and their services are limited to those , period. Doesn't have anything to do with race or sexual preference its just what they do. BTW the bible is a book that contradicts the s**t out of itself. Any reasonable person thinks its silly to quote it trying to a case either way...
Some parts aren't contradictory at all.

So what part of the Bible is a Christian business following when they refuse service to gays and lesbians? There are 7 passages that speak of same sex activity in the Bible. The book of Romans is often used to say that God views same sex activity as a sin.
Romans 1:26-28 ESV
“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.”

But that passage says nothing about how others should treat those who sin. The answers are found later on in Chapter 13.
Romans 13:1-5 (ESV)
Submission to the Authorities
“13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.”

Now I am sure that these people honestly want to follow their faith. Yet they are not following the instructions given. In fact they ignore a previous warning given at the very beginning of the text.

Romans 2 (ESV)
God's Righteous Judgment
“2 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.”

Seems to me we need to remember the old adage about where the horse should be placed. Nowhere in any of these passages does it tell these people to do what they are claiming it tells them to do.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#1115 Jan 26, 2014
In this country if religion leaves the government alone the government leaves it alone. If a religion wants to be a LEGITIMATE part of the community it needs to obey civil laws.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#1116 Jan 26, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
The constitution is clear and it is on ALL side of Americans. All Americans have rights
Agreed. It is YOUR understanding of what those rights mean that is questionable.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#1117 Jan 26, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct. The Federal government defines marriage as between one-man and one-woman, is that too difficult for you to understand?
No, it doesn't. DOMA was overturned because limiting marriage to only between opposite sex couples violates the constitutional guarantees of equal protection.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#1118 Jan 26, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would go to a baker who wanted to do business with me.
The law goes against his 1st Amendment right.
No it doesn't! The 1st Amendment doesn't give ANYONE the right to ignore the law. You are WRONG.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#1119 Jan 26, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
No it doesn't! The 1st Amendment doesn't give ANYONE the right to ignore the law. You are WRONG.
Want to know what's REALLY funny (in a tragic sort of way)?

If the baker is using the passage from Leviticus to justify what he did he is actually disobeying Leviticus by not putting the couple to death!

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1120 Jan 26, 2014
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey liar fer jeesus, you wish to restrict the rights of glbt people. As I said, if we had laws preventing fundie scum from adopting, for example, you'd consider that being anti someone - fundie trash.
No explanation is needed: The fact, despite your impairment, is that most of the democratic world has marriage equality. What you think has nothing to do with this fact.
No, actually a muslim business owner could not toss fundie morons from his business for religious reasons, because people aren't allowed to discriminate in places of public accommodation. You many be a bigot in your private life and in your house of worship of hate, however, so don't despair, Cletus.
I’m a liar because you say so? Who are you? A hater of Christians charging the government to punish those you don’t agree with.

You can’t explain it because they are not “equal”.

If you don’t allow people to be Christians in public then why would you be allowed to be gay in public?

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1121 Jan 26, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
“No, but you are an idiot whether I say so or not, so I might as well say so.” Distracting from the facts doesn’t change the facts either.

“Did you mean to say vastly?” Yes. Like you don’t have trouble with auto correct on a mobile device.

“Equal protection of the law for all persons within a state's jurisdiction is not a myth.” We are not talking about the law we are talking about the definition of marriage.

“At question is whether restricting marriage to opposite sex couples serves a compelling governmental interest. If not, such a restriction is unconstitutional.” In all of human history marriage has only been between opposite sex... What is the “compelling governmental interest.” to redefine marriage?

“None of which has any impact upon the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the law.” Explain.

“Interracial couples are different from couples of the same race, however the court has held they have the right to marry. That couples are "different" is irrelevant.” Your are comparing skin color to gender? This is where your being intellectually dishonest.

“Actually, I believe you are an idiot. Let's call a spade a spade.” And let’s call a marriage a marriage. No time in human history did the great thinkers ever propose that gays should be included in the institution of “marriage” So what makes you better than them? What makes you better than me? Just because your gay? Because your say so? These are very serious questions and I can pretty much bet you will avoid them.

“Two people with al the legal rights and protections of marriage.” Two people... You being a little too vague Father daughter? Two sisters? Uncle and nephew?

“What were you attempting to say? It's sentences like this that make me call you an idiot.” I was asking your questions... Did you ignore the question marks?

“Allowing same sex marriage in no way affects, much less punishes, anyone who would not enter into a same sex marriage.” This is the baker thread... I understand we are discussing other aspects (frankly we shouldn’t be) but my statement is in regards to not selling a wedding cake to a gay couple... You do understand this, right?

“Feel free to offer a way in which it does. However, before you do, make sure that you don't make a fool of yourself by bringing up an anti-discrimination case in a jurisdiction that does not have gay marriage. That would only further make you look like an idiot.” Like your past posts.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1122 Jan 26, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Some parts aren't contradictory at all.
So what part of the Bible is a Christian business following when they refuse service to gays and lesbians? There are 7 passages that speak of same sex activity in the Bible. The book of Romans is often used to say that God views same sex activity as a sin.
Romans 1:26-28 ESV
“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.”
But that passage says nothing about how others should treat those who sin. The answers are found later on in Chapter 13.
Romans 13:1-5 (ESV)
Submission to the Authorities
“13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.”
Now I am sure that these people honestly want to follow their faith. Yet they are not following the instructions given. In fact they ignore a previous warning given at the very beginning of the text.
Romans 2 (ESV)
God's Righteous Judgment
“2 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.”
Seems to me we need to remember the old adage about where the horse should be placed. Nowhere in any of these passages does it tell these people to do what they are claiming it tells them to do.
You just displaying your ignorance.
What it comes down to is a baker is being punished for his religious believs because your and the Judge believes he’s a bigot... Whether, that’s the truth or not, government openly punishing a man that did literally, nothing to the gay couple, sets a bad precedent for ALL Americans. Americans don’t have to agree with you that gays can be married and you advocating government punishment because of that removes the bakers rights, not yours.

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) 45 min tbird19482 14,269
SEAL U.S.BORDERS-Cults! 1 hr SEAL OUR BORDERS-... 1
Salvation Army signing up families in need for ... (Nov '09) 7 hr krystal 117
Housewife convicted of frying husband (Mar '07) 14 hr Pope Bennie s Closet 61
COMFORT DENTAL ....How Many of you feel Ripped ... (Apr '08) 14 hr Tooth Fairy 94
Dispensary with best selection of o-pen or othe... 15 hr Slowmoe 1
last post wins! (Feb '11) 17 hr mr goodwrench 24,858
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 4:05 am PST

Bleacher Report 4:05AM
Peyton Must Show Arm Strength Before Playoffs
Bleacher Report 4:32 AM
Chiefs' Week 16 Preview vs. Steelers
NBC Sports10:32 AM
Peyton Manning back at work for Broncos
Bleacher Report10:58 AM
Polamalu (Knee) Likely to Sit Sunday
Bleacher Report12:39 PM
Thomas Seeking Broncos Record for 100-Yard Receiving Games