CO Baker Found Guilty for Denying Gay Couple Wedding Cake - May Face a Year in Jail

There are 20 comments on the Gateway Pundit story from Dec 8, 2013, titled CO Baker Found Guilty for Denying Gay Couple Wedding Cake - May Face a Year in Jail. In it, Gateway Pundit reports that:

Gay activists protest the Masterpiece Cakeshop in 2012. Owner Jack Phillips now faces charges for not baking a cake for the gay couple.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Gateway Pundit.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2770 Dec 18, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
OK by the same token homosexuality should be illegal because some gays molest children.
Youth Pastor Brent Girouex Gets Probation For Molesting Young Men:
Girouex claimed he could cure the young men of their same-sex attractions by having sexual relations with them. Eight victims have come forward so far.
Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy he read Bible verses to after Sunday School.
Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child he met at his church. He pleaded guilty only to keep his family out of the liberal media's spotlight.
It works both ways.
If three people can't get married because one of them might marry a two day old baby, then gays can't get married because one of them might marry someone underage.
Why can't you see your inconsistencies?
Hmmm, maybe because gays & lesbians don't have a LOOOOONG history of adhering to a religious cult which demand forced child brides like the polygamists do?

History is your worst enemy in this regard.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#2771 Dec 18, 2013
Mob rule? I don't even approve of a lot of people being allowed to vote. I, like the founders, understand that running a country requires the most intelligent and educated people, not the ideological popularity contest elections have become.

The constitution makes the act of legislation a majority-rule activity. That's why the judicial branch is non-representational and beholden only to the constitutional.

I am a pragmatist. We live in a country of well over 300M people. There has to be a structure in place to ensure rights are respected. Antidiscrimination laws are necessary to allow recognition of all sectors of society...even christians. This case is about whether religious rights are being protected. Where you are mistaken, along with the baker, is whether a general dislike of something based on your religion trumps the right of people to participate in public accommodations. In this case, the baker loses because the marriage is a secular function and because there is no definable, doctrinal tenet of any christian faith that forbids doing business regarding a reception.
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
In a Republic you are right. Good for you! But in a majority ruled Democracy that line is drawn for you by the 51% majority.
Funny how you advocate mob rule, majority rule, Democracy, yet you insist that YOU draw the line and not someone else.
This is why I say you are inconsistent. You want to draw your own lines but you want to draw the lines for the bigot bakers.
You want to rule yourself and you want to rule others. Who appointed you God?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2772 Dec 18, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
<
If there was a law against sodomy would you obey it? Or would you ignore it and claim self sovereignty for yourself? No one has the right to tell me who I can have sex with.
Which is why all sodomy bans were found unconstitutional by a (.......wait for it .......) MAJORITY vote of the SCOTUS.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#2773 Dec 18, 2013
Bakers incorporating as a business transacting under state licensure MUST follow all pertinent laws. There's no bigot exception. Even religious exemptions are very narrow; for instance, a kosher restaurant can ignore some restrictions because judaism has very specific, established dietary laws that must be followed. Christianity has no dietary laws. The bible does say christians should follow secular laws, however.

The baker can live his life, but his business, that legal entity, must follow the laws.
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
Bigot bakers bake cakes for straights. Gays are certainly welcome to buy cakes but not wedding cakes. If you don't like that you can go find another baker.
How can anyone respect your inconsistencies? You want the Republic to guarantee you the freedom to live your life the way you want and you want the power of voting to tell the baker how he must live his.
This is so contradictory and sick there are not words enough for it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2774 Dec 18, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that the law is wrong.
Just because you lack trust does not give you the right to pass laws taking away the responsibility of parents to raise their children properly. They are not your children.
And we are not talking about fully loaded shotguns we were talking about sex. Something you want to enjoy but refuse to allow others to enjoy.
The German Government recognizes that their 14 year old kids are fully capable of making informed decisions about if they want to have sex and who they want to have it with.
You are saying that German children are more mature and responsible than American children who aren't mature and responsible until they turn 18.
You want the least possible amount of freedom going the the fewest people possible while I want the most people to enjoy the most freedom.
You are morally bankrupt and I am a decent human being helping humanity. Those are facts.
No, I'm saying in my opinion the people who made the laws in Germany as well as in the US were wrong when they allowed children as young as age 14 to be married off.

In the US the primary reason to allow those under age 18 to marry was because men like their sexual partners young and the girl often got pregnant. The father didn't want to be financially responsible for raising his own grandchild, so it was better to marry her off and let someone else take financial responsibility for her.

Even if they didn't get pregnant, the last thing a man wanted was to have to take financial care of his daughters into adulthood, so better to marry them off as young as possible.

Times have changed with regard to women being able to financially care for themselves, but the laws still exist, and nearly all medical professionals agree a 14 y/o is not emotionally & psychologically capable making such a decision. That's also why no state allows them to vote.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2775 Dec 18, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
As is Sheeple retarded and poorly raised. I suspect it has to do with something some government law requires to be put into the water supply.
I get my water from my own well.

Oh, you suspected wrong yet again.

Gee, what a shocker.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#2776 Dec 18, 2013
I live in Indiana. We were run by the KKK for many years. It wasn't the market that allowed blacks, jews. catholics, etc to work and transact freely, it was direct governmental intervention. Market forces didn't overturn jim crow laws. Ask women how well they fared on the basis of market forces. It's a Randian fantasy that market forces fix anything and as believable as the power of prayer.
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
You do not know the economy or the market. Government has never corrected social inequities. It was the market place that corrected them.
Government passed laws but it was big business that stepped up to the plate, not because they were forced to by the laws but because it was the right thing to do. When bigot business saw that it worked to not discriminate then they too joined the band wagon.
If there was a law against sodomy would you obey it? Or would you ignore it and claim self sovereignty for yourself? No one has the right to tell me who I can have sex with.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2777 Dec 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO! It's about 44F here on SF Bay. Now I will have to explain to Sheeple that doesn't mean I want to force a baby to marry me.
Unfortunately for you, many polygamists DO want to force children into their "marriages".

“SCOTUS will Rule in June for”

Since: Aug 08

MARRIAGE EQUALITY:-)

#2778 Dec 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
NorCal tries to play down the importance of this big step toward marriage equality for polygamists because she doesn't like them and wishes to deny them the right to marry.
She also glazes over the fact that this decision made polygamy no longer a felony in Utah.
You're such a LIAR, but then it is obvious that you don't really care about polygamist either otherwise you'd be truthful with regards to this ruling!!!!

Sorry, but it DIDN'T make polygamy ANYTHING of the sort....it just DEALT with the Cohabitation aspect of the law and NOTHING else!!!
Toys R Us kid

Sacramento, CA

#2779 Dec 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting point.
Coincidentally I watched "The Laramie Project" last night and wouldn't you know it there were people in town saying surely there were worse offenders out there the police should be targeting instead of those two nice boys who just beat up a queer.....
Did this baker beat up a 'queer'???

Give it a rest.

One poster in here mentioned the marketplace actions in terms of the loss of business will in no way act in terms of social injustices.

That's a load of crap as well. The vast majority of customers who this baker would benefit from are now gone. He'd be able to remain alive as a baker given there's still a segment of fundamentalist Christians who no doubt would buy his good but he has no real ability to move forward with his ideals given the market will put a stop to it.

Add to that this baker advised he would bake the 2 gay men in question a cake, a load of brownies or the f-ing Eiffel Tower in icing covered devils food baked wonder but just not a wedding cake.

The 2 gays in this case aren't heroes here by their insistence the baker get ground into the dirt but punks as are those who support jail time for a man who holds no more harm to the homosexual community than some guy not wanting to allow gays into his church bingo group.
William of Baskerville

Justice, IL

#2780 Dec 18, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Don't play language games with me, you'll lose every time.
You spliced a comma, you TWIT!

LOL

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2781 Dec 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why do you want to punish people who didn't break the laws, like most polygamists?
Polygamists aren't being punished except when they break the law, just like anyone else in America.
William of Baskerville

Justice, IL

#2782 Dec 18, 2013
Let's not muddy the waters: Rev. Alan should be inducted into the Topix Hall of Fame.

Mama Cass, toss the towel in for sheeples and petey!
William of Baskerville

Justice, IL

#2783 Dec 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately for you, many polygamists DO want to force children into their "marriages".
NY Times has featured polygamy every day this week.

Only two authorities argued against it: both are homosexual--and as insanely argumentative as you and petey!
Toys R Us kid

Sacramento, CA

#2784 Dec 18, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
I live in Indiana. We were run by the KKK for many years. It wasn't the market that allowed blacks, jews. catholics, etc to work and transact freely, it was direct governmental intervention. Market forces didn't overturn jim crow laws. Ask women how well they fared on the basis of market forces. It's a Randian fantasy that market forces fix anything and as believable as the power of prayer.
<quoted text>
More uncalled for drama.

We're not talking about men being lynched you stupid fool. We're not talking about a baker who sneaks out at night to burn down homosexual meeting centers, beat up random gays or is working on denying gays the ability to live within a 10 mile radius of his house.

This baker advised he is more than willing to bake this little couple a boatload of bagels for that matter, just not a wedding cake because it went against his beliefs.

Let it go and let the market deal with it rather than destroy this mans livelihood. You look like pathetic little bastards by dancing around and aligning this baker to the KKK you idiot.

You don't think the market will take root and effectively diminish this mans business with all the publicity then you know about as much of economics as you do the thoughts of a dead man.

It's just ignorant vengeful vindictiveness on your behalf given you think he slighted gays so therefore he must be burned at the stake given your overzealous sensitivities on the matter.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2785 Dec 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
There are perfectly good laws against crime. How does the law making the marriage of three consenting adult men illegal possibly reduce crime, dummy?
Please explain why we must have a type of marriage be illegal in order to reduce crime. Please explain why you don't want to use the perfectly good laws against crime against crime.
Please explain how a man abusing a child will get worse if he marries her. Please explain why the law against marrying children shouldn't be used to prevent the marriage of children instead of making a whole class of people criminals.
Every state currently allows children under age 18 to be married off against their will.

Until that changes, the only way to decrease the number of polygamous child brides is to keep it illegal.

Granted that won't stop all child bride marriages, but at least it will prevent some of that abuse.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#2786 Dec 18, 2013
Cops do not make the laws, but are tasked with enforcing them. They ruined no lives. If you choose to break the law, break it, but don't pretend there are no possible consequences. Work to change the law.

A marijuana charge, unless you're selling, hardly ruins one's life. In many places it's a misdemeanor, you pay a fine or do community service.

How about you teach kids to follow the rules until they can change them? AND WHY THE FU** ARE KIDS SMOKING ANYTHING?
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
The things is, you'd never know, but the bigots would.
I saw an episode of COPS,[I hate that show!] where after a day of arresting kids for drugs these cops went to a pizza place to drink beer, smoke cigarettes and make jokes about all the kids they arrested and ruined their lives.
One of their waiters had previously been arrested for standing next to a joint by one of the beer drinking, cigarette smoking cops.
Do I need to say more about people putting things into the food of people who wrong them?
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#2787 Dec 18, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
You're such a LIAR, but then it is obvious that you don't really care about polygamist either otherwise you'd be truthful with regards to this ruling!!!!
Sorry, but it DIDN'T make polygamy ANYTHING of the sort....it just DEALT with the Cohabitation aspect of the law and NOTHING else!!!
You have proven that you are an idiot.

In June 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that state laws criminalizing private, non-commercial sexual activity between consenting adults at home on the grounds of morality are unconstitutional since there is insufficient justification for intruding into people's liberty and privacy.

Sound familiar? Much like the current ruling regarding polygamy.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2788 Dec 18, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
He will be if the gay couple gets their way.
It's the Attorney General who is prosecuting the bigot baker, and it's the judge who will decide any punishment.

The gay couple no longer has anything to do with the case.
Toys R Us kid

Sacramento, CA

#2789 Dec 18, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Bakers incorporating as a business transacting under state licensure MUST follow all pertinent laws. There's no bigot exception. Even religious exemptions are very narrow; for instance, a kosher restaurant can ignore some restrictions because judaism has very specific, established dietary laws that must be followed. Christianity has no dietary laws. The bible does say christians should follow secular laws, however.
The baker can live his life, but his business, that legal entity, must follow the laws.
<quoted text>
Who are you going to go after nedxt Linebacker Louie???

Ten year old kids selling lemonade on a hot August day given they took their goods and ran as soon as a big, hairy man dressed up as Liza Minelli came their way after attending a drag queen show looking for a little refreshment only to scare the kiddies shitless leaving the Liza wanna-be parched and dry???

Hell Linebacker Larry....let's send those kids to juvenile hall for their infraction against the mighty gay community.

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.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 17 min Rick in Kansas 3,423
News Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 46 min GayleWood 2,449
News Mark Hopkins: The Supreme Court and gay marriage 47 min IQ Kid 25
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 1 hr RevKen 32,371
News 8 Shocking Statements Opponents Of Marriage Equ... 2 hr Lawrence Wolf 90
News Judge proposes Oregon bakery pay $135,000 to le... 2 hr WeTheSheeple 527
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 3 hr tongangodz 3,077
More from around the web