CO Baker Found Guilty for Denying Gay...

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

There are 16410 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.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#8081 Mar 19, 2014
SHADOW wrote:
A simple person like you should understand this better.
You are the one who confused defend as a synonym for uphold, but I'll play along for laughs. Tell me what I don't understand here.
Johnny wrote:
Holder obama not anyone can tell a states attorney general not to honor his oath no matter how many queers say otherwise.
But they didn't, weren't you paying attention?
Johnny wrote:
Do you know what an oath is?
Yes I do dear, do you actually know what these folks have sworn to do? Defending unconstitutional laws passed by the people and/or the Legislature from legal challenge, not part of it. Upholding those laws while they wait to be ruled unconstitutional is a part of their oath, defending them ain't. Sorry. Just so you know, this was a concept first come up with by the Reagan administration.
Johnny wrote:
Obviously your president doesn't as he continues to rule as a king.
Uh-huh.
Johnny wrote:
Funny how your kind was all over obama just a few years ago when he said marriage was between one man and one woman, but of course that appears to just be another obama campaign LIE.
Obama the flip flopper just like heinz 57 kerry.
Gee, I thought you were going to explain to me what it was that I didn't understand, I already knew you were suffering from ODS and the heterosexual learning disorder...

poof

Madison, WI

#8082 Mar 19, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution is supposed to protect the Bakers right to associate. His religion is irrelevant.
The government is supposed to stay out of religion and let them run it the way their leaders want.
The baker is discriminating, I NEVER claimed he wasn't. I said he has a right to discriminate and he exercised his right. The church has a right to discriminate both to whom they make their leaders and to whom they let in their doors.
You are trying to make orange juice from apples.
Now, if you can't pay attention to the details don't ask again.
That is not what you have posted before. YOU said that the baker could discriminate against gays, if his/her religion so dictated.

In another post you where biatching that the Christian religion discriminates against females.

Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8083 Mar 19, 2014
SHADOW wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a queer with an over the rainbow dream. Courts will not defeat the will of the people.
It is how our laws work--judges don't make law fool.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahehehehehehehehehehehehehehe hehehehehehehehe
I laugh in your freaky face bad breath.
Prop 8, dumbass. The Court overturned the will of the people.

And the court overturned Texass' ban, too. Looks like you are a dumbass.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8084 Mar 19, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
And when the Constitution says, "Congress shall make no law...." And Congress makes a law....
Baking a cake is NOT a religious practice.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8085 Mar 19, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG an authoritarian admits there are such things as unconstitutional laws. This is amazing. Next thing you know you'll be admitting the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats at destroying our country and taking away our freedoms.
What's amazing is that you remember to breathe.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8086 Mar 19, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
You are as consistent as are Diane Fienstein and party girl Nancy Pelosi. When you can use the Constitution to protect your rights you are all for it, but when you can get an unconstitutional law forcing people to bake cakes passed then screw the Constitution. With your level of dishonesty it is pointless to discuss anything with you. You make normal conversation IMPOSSIBLE!
What court ruled that law unconstitutional? The Rev Anal's Court?
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8088 Mar 19, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution is supposed to protect the Bakers right to associate. His religion is irrelevant.
The government is supposed to stay out of religion and let them run it the way their leaders want.
The baker is discriminating, I NEVER claimed he wasn't. I said he has a right to discriminate and he exercised his right. The church has a right to discriminate both to whom they make their leaders and to whom they let in their doors.
You are trying to make orange juice from apples.
Now, if you can't pay attention to the details don't ask again.
A bakery is NOT a church, you old fool.
SHADOW

Piscataway, NJ

#8089 Mar 19, 2014
cpeter1313 wrote:
The constitution overrides the will of the people every time.
How many SSM bans have courts overturned now?
As for the people...over half the population favors SSM now.
<quoted text>
They tolerate it not the same as favor by any means. If they favored it they would be doing the same sex thing which they are not.
Yes before you queers started cryig the will of the people met something and it still does.
What ya gonna do when this next election returns the presidency abd the senate to conservatives and we just reverse the damage you squeeky 2% have done
Bye you gender confused same sexers. After the elections you will be forced by law to stay in your home in the closet or be stoned.
SHADOW

Piscataway, NJ

#8090 Mar 19, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Baking a cake is NOT a religious practice.
Neither is trying to have perverted sex with a member of the same sex-----PUKE
SHADOW

Piscataway, NJ

#8091 Mar 19, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8, dumbass. The Court overturned the will of the people.
And the court overturned Texass' ban, too. Looks like you are a dumbass.
Texas got an immediate stay and we will defeat this liberal same sex judge believe me we will laugh last pervert.
Remember a conservative judge can just reverse this crazy perversion

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8092 Mar 19, 2014
poof wrote:
<quoted text>That is not what you have posted before. YOU said that the baker could discriminate against gays, if his/her religion so dictated.
In another post you where biatching that the Christian religion discriminates against females.
I said he has the right to discriminate and if he wants to use his religion to justify it then who cares. It is not important why someone discriminates only that they have the right to do so for any reason.

I was not "biatching" [what ever that is] about the KKKristian religion I was quoting the god damned stupid Bible where it has men above women like Jesus is above men. Oh yeah, the Bible has women right up there with oxen, goats, sheep and cattle.

http://libertycrier.com/it-cant-happen-here/
This video is for all those who imagine that there is some sort of magic that renders the United States immune to the tyranny that has plagued every other major empire in history.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8093 Mar 19, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Baking a cake is NOT a religious practice.
Then why don't you stick your head in an oven?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8094 Mar 19, 2014
http://libertycrier.com/it-cant-happen-here/
This video is for all those who imagine that there is some sort of magic that renders the United States immune to the tyranny that has plagued every other major empire in history.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8095 Mar 20, 2014
Reverend Alan wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why don't you stick your head in an oven?
Oh look! Yet another well reasoned argument from our resident anarchist. How exciting.
Xavier Breath

Brooklyn, NY

#8096 Mar 20, 2014
SHADOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Texas got an immediate stay and we will defeat this liberal same sex judge believe me we will laugh last pervert.
Remember a conservative judge can just reverse this crazy perversion
You have no clue how any of this works, do you? No wonder you're always surprised when you lose.
Dan

United States

#8097 Mar 20, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Baking a cake is NOT a religious practice.
Not having one baked for you isn't a civil rights violation.
People have the right to freedom of religious practice. People also have the right to contract for goods and services, but it's a two-way agreement.
People should not be forced by law into entering into contracts.
Very soon, I'm afraid, there will be "discrimination" suits based on perceived "discrimination" if the service provided is inferior vs. simply refused.
i.e. "the baker was christian, I knopw they are christian, and they made a crappy wedding cake on purpose"
.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#8098 Mar 20, 2014
Dan wrote:
Not having one baked for you isn't a civil rights violation.
The Judge who heard the facts of the case disagrees with you on that.
Dan wrote:
People have the right to freedom of religious practice.
Yes they do, but it doesn't give them the right to violate the law.
Dan wrote:
People also have the right to contract for goods and services, but it's a two-way agreement.
Uh-huh.
Dan wrote:
People should not be forced by law into entering into contracts.
You are more than 50 years late on that thought.
Dan wrote:
Very soon, I'm afraid, there will be "discrimination" suits based on perceived "discrimination" if the service provided is inferior vs. simply refused.
Which is why we have a judicial system to hear the evidence.
Dan wrote:
i.e. "the baker was christian, I knopw they are christian, and they made a crappy wedding cake on purpose"
.
Which again is why we have courts.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8099 Mar 20, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no clue how any of this works, do you? No wonder you're always surprised when you lose.
pot/kettle

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8100 Mar 20, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Not having one baked for you isn't a civil rights violation.
People have the right to freedom of religious practice. People also have the right to contract for goods and services, but it's a two-way agreement.
People should not be forced by law into entering into contracts.
Very soon, I'm afraid, there will be "discrimination" suits based on perceived "discrimination" if the service provided is inferior vs. simply refused.
i.e. "the baker was christian, I knopw they are christian, and they made a crappy wedding cake on purpose"
You can't reason with X-Breath. I know you are trying to help him, but he is convinced that Bakers should sacrifice their rights so that gays can celebrate theirs. He is thrilled that he can flaunt his power to force people who don't like him to do things for him. He refuses to acknowledge that that turns them into people who hate him. That is just all roses roses for him because he believes that what has happened to all, previous super powers can't happen in the United States. The poor boy is divorced from reality and hasn't a care in the world about the harm he brings to humanity.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#8101 Mar 20, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Which again is why we have courts.
Why do we have authoritarians who are communist apologists Rick? What purpose do you serve exactly?

""""Yes, anti-discrimination laws are unconstitutional
The Constitution exists to protect your right to be free, your right to pursue happiness. Your freedom and happiness are not contingent upon whether or not someone else agrees with you or whether or not some one likes you. You freedom is yours, if you do not like something then you're free to do something else. You're free to support someone else or any business you choose. If your not happy, then you're free to do something about it. Change jobs, start your own business, move to another place, be around like minded people. The Constitution does not state or even suggest that life is fair and that everyone is the same. The 14th amendment has to due with equal treatment under the law, it does not mean make laws to force people to treat others equally. For example, there is a law against murder. The fourteenth amendment protects people by making it illegal for one person to receive a harsher sentence than another simply because they are of a different race, color, creed, etc... The fourteenth amendment does not protect people against discrimination by another individual. Plain and simple. Freedom and happiness are yours and yours alone. The government has no right to force anyone to treat anyone else a certain way because then the government has taken away your right to freedom and your right to pursue happiness. Anti-discrimination Laws infringe on an individuals freedom to choose whom to associate with, whom to do business with etc. Therefore Anti-discrimination Laws are Unconstitutional. """

Are anti-discrimination laws unconstitutional?
64% Say Yes
36% Say No
http://www.debate.org/opinions/are-anti-discr...

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 Muslim cleric tells Australians: 'Husbands shou... (Jan '09) 3 hr Vikram 54
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 14 hr crucifiedguy 4,740
News Video company challenges gay marriage law Thu Shirvell s Shrivel 2
News Were 'Fixer Upper' Stars Chip and Joanna Gaines... Thu Shirvell s Shrivel 18
News Democrats pressure Obama to offer blanket pardo... Wed Wildchild 1
News Japan's sex problem is so bad that people are q... Wed Dr Modi 1
News Nicole Kidman's priest says actress hopes one d... Dec 6 Sco-ttt 2
More from around the web