Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

Jun 6, 2013 Full story: Denver Post 5,418

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
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1709 May 7, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
So basically ignoring the First Amendment by forcing a shop owner to support “gay marriage” with his talents, or punish him with fines and jail. Good to see you stand for ALL Americans. <sarcasm.
All Americans aren't as ignorant as you. My religion says people like you should be thrown to the lions. Now tell me why YOUR religious beliefs take precedence over mine, since you think you know so much about the First Amendment. And where in the world did you get the stupid idea that your religious beliefs trump the law of the land?

Baking a cake is NOT forcing someone to support gay marriage. The baker has the choice to go out of the wedding cake business altogether. Odd that gay money is good enough for birthday cakes.....but not wedding cakes.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1710 May 7, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really comparing the reservation of a wedding cake for a husband and wife to a child sacrifice? Your comparison is poor, without thought and invalid.
On that note, I would bet that you support “child sacrifice” under the guides and lie of “women’s health” and “woman’s right to choose.” BUT that’s for a different thread.
Are you REALLY that dim-witted?

Your particular religious beliefs get NO PREFERENTIAL treatment from the government. When the baker obtained his license to operate a business, he agreed to play by the rules. The government doesn't care what your religious beliefs are.
You can call me Dick

United States

#1711 May 7, 2014
In this case I see the cake maker as an artist. I believe he has the right to decide where is displayed and what he wants his art to depict. Had it been argued that way, not a judge or jury that would, o could rule against it.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1712 May 7, 2014
You can call me Dick wrote:
In this case I see the cake maker as an artist. I believe he has the right to decide where is displayed and what he wants his art to depict. Had it been argued that way, not a judge or jury that would, o could rule against it.
Wanna bet?

Perhaps you aren't familiar with this case. Here: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/asse...
You can call me Dick

Loxahatchee, FL

#1713 May 7, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Wanna bet?
Perhaps you aren't familiar with this case. Here: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/asse...
I will type slower.

I said that I see the cake as art, and had it been brought before a judge or jury as art under the the first amendment and not a religious value a judge or jury would not have touched it.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1714 May 8, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
They didn't. There are people who religiously believe that infidels are evil and do not want to serve them. They still can't discriminate.
There are people who religiously believe that black people are evil and do not want to serve them. They still can't discriminate.
<quoted text>
No, the problem is that you're making up rights that don't exist.
It’s not about refusing service. It’s about being forced to support an institution with personal talents that one does NOT support.

Will you be the one to prosecute the gay baker who is asked to make a wedding cake with the words “marriage is ONLY for a husband and wife” and refuses? Don’t say it won’t happen because we all have heard of the despicable things the Westboro Baptist Church have done, so it absolutely can happen.

“No, the problem is that you're making up rights that don't exist.” You mean like the right to marry? Marriage is NOT a government institution, nor should it be regulated by government, BUT that’s where were are at. The government is redefining marriage and forcing shop owners to support an institution they don’t believe in.

The fact is government will redefine marriage to include gays, despite the hundreds of millions of Americans who hold traditional marriage dear and important. Are you going to be the one who wants the government to remove that belief from Americans through legislation?

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1715 May 8, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text> All Americans aren't as ignorant as you. My religion says people like you should be thrown to the lions. Now tell me why YOUR religious beliefs take precedence over mine, since you think you know so much about the First Amendment. And where in the world did you get the stupid idea that your religious beliefs trump the law of the land?
Baking a cake is NOT forcing someone to support gay marriage. The baker has the choice to go out of the wedding cake business altogether. Odd that gay money is good enough for birthday cakes.....but not wedding cakes.
Throwing insults at someone is what one does when they have no argument.
The fact is government will redefine marriage to include gays, despite the hundreds of millions of Americans who hold traditional marriage dear and important. Are you going to be the one who wants the government to remove that belief from Americans through legislation?

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1716 May 8, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you REALLY that dim-witted?
Your particular religious beliefs get NO PREFERENTIAL treatment from the government. When the baker obtained his license to operate a business, he agreed to play by the rules. The government doesn't care what your religious beliefs are.
More insults?
It should because of the first Amendment. You see the government’s ONLY job is to protect liberties not to force people to bend to your will.
I know you support legalized child sacrifice as well, don’t you?
Level 4

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1717 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
It’s not about refusing service. It’s about being forced to support an institution with personal talents that one does NOT support.
No one is being forced to support any institution. They simply must sell a product, which is something they're already willing to do.
Respect71 wrote:
Will you be the one to prosecute the gay baker who is asked to make a wedding cake with the words “marriage is ONLY for a husband and wife” and refuses? Don’t say it won’t happen because we all have heard of the despicable things the Westboro Baptist Church have done, so it absolutely can happen.
That action can't be prosecuted. Anti-discrimination laws prevent businesses from discriminating against *customers*, not against *content*.

The gay couple who wanted a wedding cake did not ask for the baker to do anything the baker does not ALREADY DO: bake a cake.
Respect71 wrote:
“No, the problem is that you're making up rights that don't exist.” You mean like the right to marry? Marriage is NOT a government institution, nor should it be regulated by government, BUT that’s where were are at.
Marriage IS a government institution. And equal protection and application of laws is a right.
Respect71 wrote:
The fact is government will redefine marriage to include gays, despite the hundreds of millions of Americans who hold traditional marriage dear and important. Are you going to be the one who wants the government to remove that belief from Americans through legislation?
What are you talking about? No one's belief is removed. You can believe whatever you want.

Having a belief that marriage is only for straight couples doesn't entitle you to force that belief upon everyone else.

And not being allowed to force it upon everyone else isn't a violation of your beliefs.

Slaveowners believed that slavery was their moral right ordained by God. When slavery was banned, was their religious freedom violated?
Level 4

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1718 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
It should because of the first Amendment. You see the government’s ONLY job is to protect liberties not to force people to bend to your will.
Respect, your position on SSM is anti-liberty.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Level 2

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#1719 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
What a surprise more insults, I sit in disbelief.
The government has to REDEFINE marriage in order for the law to include gays. If there was NO distinction then why does marriage have to be REDEFINED? This is where your intellectual honesty is astounding.
Because you, yourself can’t have be honest a draw specific lines, it is not blatantly obvious you have no regard for our Constitution and those who don’t agree with redefining marriage.
AGAIN, the fact is that the government will REDEFINE marriage to include gays, and I asked you specifically to draw the line.
Can people with faith or even without faith, disagree with “gay marriage” at all?
How important is it for government to FORCE Americans to use their talents in support of “gay marriage”?
Question.

If marriage was "ALWAYS" one man one woman, why did so many places change the laws in the last 20 years to say that?

Isn't that also "re-defining marriage"
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1720 May 8, 2014
You can call me Dick wrote:
<quoted text>
I will type slower.
I said that I see the cake as art, and had it been brought before a judge or jury as art under the the first amendment and not a religious value a judge or jury would not have touched it.
Dick,
Read the damn decision. The First Amendment issue is discussed. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/asse...

Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1721 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
More insults?
It should because of the first Amendment. You see the government’s ONLY job is to protect liberties not to force people to bend to your will.
I know you support legalized child sacrifice as well, don’t you?
Right.... I support child sacrifice.... sure.... damn...... just how ignorant are you?

Rights aren't absolute. Your rights end where mine begin. You DO NOT have a right to violate the law and use your religion as an excuse. The government has EVERY right to provide a discrimination-free market place. If you don't agree with that, you can either go back to school and stay awake in civics class and LEARN or you can move. I am tired of illiterate fools shooting off their mouths about what they think the Constitution means. The Constitution means what SCOTUS says it means!

In 1990, Scalia wrote the majority opinion in Employment Division v. Smith, concluding that the First Amendment “does not require” the government to grant “religious exemptions” from generally applicable laws or civic obligations. The right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability,” Scalia wrote in the 6-3 majority decision, going on to aggressively argue that such exemptions could be a slippery slope to lawlessness.

“The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind,” he wrote,“ranging from compulsory military service, to the payment of taxes, to health and safety regulation such as manslaughter and child neglect laws, compulsory vaccination laws, drug laws, and traffic laws; to social welfare legislation such as minimum wage laws, child labor laws, animal cruelty laws, environmental protection laws, and laws providing for equality of opportunity for the races.”“To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1722 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Throwing insults at someone is what one does when they have no argument.
The fact is government will redefine marriage to include gays, despite the hundreds of millions of Americans who hold traditional marriage dear and important. Are you going to be the one who wants the government to remove that belief from Americans through legislation?
I have no argument? Honey, this argument was resolved almost 25 years ago. Tell me.... do you re-invent the wheel every day when you get up, or do you learn from history?

The government doesn't give a flying fuck about what you believe. Their only concern is your conduct. Break the law, suffer the consequences.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#1723 May 8, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
Will you be the one to prosecute the gay baker who is asked to make a wedding cake with the words “marriage is ONLY for a husband and wife” and refuses? Don’t say it won’t happen because we all have heard of the despicable things the Westboro Baptist Church have done, so it absolutely can happen.
That would be a freedom of speech issue, dumbass. Not the same thing. In this case, nothing..... I repeat, NOTHING was discussed about "words on the cake."
You can call me Dick

United States

#1724 May 9, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Dick,
Read the damn decision. The First Amendment issue is discussed. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/asse...
You go to the Findings of Fact. I'll make it easy for you skip to one that starts with the number 9. The smoking gun for my argument!

Game set and match goes to Dick

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1725 May 9, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is being forced to support any institution. They simply must sell a product, which is something they're already willing to do.
<quoted text>
That action can't be prosecuted. Anti-discrimination laws prevent businesses from discriminating against *customers*, not against *content*.
The gay couple who wanted a wedding cake did not ask for the baker to do anything the baker does not ALREADY DO: bake a cake.
<quoted text>
Marriage IS a government institution. And equal protection and application of laws is a right.
<quoted text>
What are you talking about? No one's belief is removed. You can believe whatever you want.
Having a belief that marriage is only for straight couples doesn't entitle you to force that belief upon everyone else.
And not being allowed to force it upon everyone else isn't a violation of your beliefs.
Slaveowners believed that slavery was their moral right ordained by God. When slavery was banned, was their religious freedom violated?
“No one is being forced to support any institution. They simply must sell a product, which is something they're already willing to do.” For a husband and wife.

“That action can't be prosecuted. Anti-discrimination laws prevent businesses from discriminating against *customers*, not against *content*.” LOL… If the gay baker refuses to write the statement on the cake then he breaks the law and faces fines and jail, discriminating against the customer.

“The gay couple who wanted a wedding cake did not ask for the baker to do anything the baker does not ALREADY DO: bake a cake.” For husband and wife couples.

“Marriage IS a government institution. And equal protection and application of laws is a right.”
You are either blatantly ignorant or sorely uneducated. Please cite the official document that states,““Marriage IS a government institution.”

“What are you talking about? No one's belief is removed. You can believe whatever you want. Having a belief that marriage is only for straight couples doesn't entitle you to force that belief upon everyone else.” Explain how not serving a wedding cake is forcing a belief upon the gay couple, then explain how suing the baker for the gay couple isn’t forcing their views upon him.

“Slaveowners believed that slavery was their moral right ordained by God. When slavery was banned, was their religious freedom violated?” Slavery is not the same as reserving a wedding cake for husband and wife.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1726 May 9, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Respect, your position on SSM is anti-liberty.
You do understand that I am FOR “gay marriage”, so please explain how that is “anti-liberty.”.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1727 May 9, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Question.
If marriage was "ALWAYS" one man one woman, why did so many places change the laws in the last 20 years to say that?
Isn't that also "re-defining marriage"
Cite the laws changed that you are speaking of please.

Level 6

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#1728 May 9, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Right.... I support child sacrifice.... sure.... damn...... just how ignorant are you?
Rights aren't absolute. Your rights end where mine begin. You DO NOT have a right to violate the law and use your religion as an excuse. The government has EVERY right to provide a discrimination-free market place. If you don't agree with that, you can either go back to school and stay awake in civics class and LEARN or you can move. I am tired of illiterate fools shooting off their mouths about what they think the Constitution means. The Constitution means what SCOTUS says it means!
In 1990, Scalia wrote the majority opinion in Employment Division v. Smith, concluding that the First Amendment “does not require” the government to grant “religious exemptions” from generally applicable laws or civic obligations. The right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applicability,” Scalia wrote in the 6-3 majority decision, going on to aggressively argue that such exemptions could be a slippery slope to lawlessness.
“The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind,” he wrote,“ranging from compulsory military service, to the payment of taxes, to health and safety regulation such as manslaughter and child neglect laws, compulsory vaccination laws, drug laws, and traffic laws; to social welfare legislation such as minimum wage laws, child labor laws, animal cruelty laws, environmental protection laws, and laws providing for equality of opportunity for the races.”“To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”
A wedding cake isn’t neutral.

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 KarlVIIIII 14,233
Obama Determined To Start A Race War 13 min toad4754 3
last post wins! (Feb '11) 2 hr mr goodwrench 24,850
Housewife convicted of frying husband (Mar '07) 6 hr dragoon70056 60
Denver police investigate fatal accident at RTD... 6 hr Sniper II 2
Denver tar 9 hr Leanndunne859 3
Teacher back in class after Bush-Hitler comparison (Mar '06) 17 hr Sniper II 95
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 10:18 am PST

NBC Sports10:18AM
Peyton Manning ducks out of practice for treatment
NFL10:41 AM
Peyton Manning exits practice for thigh treatment
ESPN11:33 AM
Bengals' Iloka: Manziel-Peyton talk 'foolish'
NBC Sports 1:03 PM
Manning limited at practice with thigh injury - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:27 PM
Chiefs' draft picks starting to produce late - NBC Sports