Colo. gay discrimination alleged over...

Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake

There are 37364 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.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#2247 Jun 12, 2014
IN ORDER TO STAY FAITHFUL TO HIS BELIEFS, he decided he will no longer do wedding cakes.

Therefore he is still being able to practice his faith under the 1st Amendment.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#2248 Jun 12, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
The First Amendment does not allow one to break any laws they like.
If my religion promotes ritual sacrifice, do murder laws infringe upon my 1A rights?
Update: Oklahoma candidate says homosexuality is “worthy of death”
http://kfor.com/2014/06/10/oklahoma-political...

"....Morris said,“This guy posted on Facebook that homosexuals should be stoned to death. My first response was you’re nuts, nobody would be stupid enough to do that.”

Morris says he found those postings from last summer on Facebook....."

Does Respect71 also feel it's OK to stone people to death because of their religious beliefs? He always seems to dodge that issue.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#2249 Jun 12, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
He has decided to close shop,
He's still in business.Why are you lying?
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text> because of the Colorado Civil Liberty Commissions, bias decision, to ignore law and force him to serve a wedding cake for an institution he dose not believe in.
He's still in business.Why are you lying?
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>The baker did NOT discriminate against gays, and in fact has served gays out of his shop.
He also agreed to the findings of fact BECAUSE it turns out he did discriminate for refusing to sell wedding cakes to his gay and lesbian customers.
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>The real issue here: is it right for government to force an American to use his personal talents to support an institution he doesn’t believe in, order him to do so or lose his livelihood.
He's still in business.
Why are you lying?
And since he admits he serves gays and lesbians, He also agreed to the findings of fact BECAUSE it turns out he did discriminate for refusing to sell wedding cakes to his gay and lesbian customers.
So again, Why are you lying?
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>So explain why you desire to use government force your beliefs upon a man who believes different as you?
He's still in business. And it's not "my beliefs" that are the issue here. It's obeying the same laws every other baker does.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2250 Jun 13, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. You can't force people to believe anything. And no one is trying to.
Yes, you, gay activists and the government is trying to force a baker to, use his personal talents to provide a WEDDING cake to an institution of which he doesn’t support or agree with. What is a wedding to you? To the baker it only consists of a husband and wife.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2251 Jun 13, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
The First Amendment does not allow one to break any laws they like.
If my religion promotes ritual sacrifice, do murder laws infringe upon my 1A rights?
No they don’t because your “ritual sacrifice” would impose your belief upon an innocent, removing their individual rights given by their Creator. What rights were removed from the gay couple by the non-sale of a wedding cake? Did the baker deny their marriage? Take away their MA License? Remove their gayness? No, only a wedding cake of which they can take a pick of many other cake shops in the metro area.
My guess is you believe in Abortion under the guides of “woman’s right to choose” don’t you? Child sacrifice is real and legal in the USA and my guess is you support that without reservation. Do you really want to compare ripping babies from their mother’s womb to the non-sale of a WEDDING CAKE? No comparison.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2252 Jun 13, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>He's still in business.Why are you lying?
<quoted text>He's still in business.Why are you lying?
<quoted text> He also agreed to the findings of fact BECAUSE it turns out he did discriminate for refusing to sell wedding cakes to his gay and lesbian customers.
<quoted text>He's still in business.
Why are you lying?
And since he admits he serves gays and lesbians, He also agreed to the findings of fact BECAUSE it turns out he did discriminate for refusing to sell wedding cakes to his gay and lesbian customers.
So again, Why are you lying?
<quoted text>He's still in business. And it's not "my beliefs" that are the issue here. It's obeying the same laws every other baker does.
“He's still in business.Why are you lying?” My apologies… The baker remains in business but gives up a large share of revenue by NOT selling wedding cakes at all.
DENVER (CBS4) reported on May 30 2014 “The owner of a bakery in Lakewood said he will no longer sell wedding cakes after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled he did discriminate against a gay couple when he refused to sell them a cake.”
But that’s you goal to hurt Americans based on the fact they believe different as you.
“He also agreed to the findings of fact BECAUSE it turns out he did discriminate for refusing to sell wedding cakes to his gay and lesbian customers.” He has always claimed to reserve wedding cakes for husband a wife couples… So therefore what?

“He's still in business. And it's not "my beliefs" that are the issue here. It's obeying the same laws every other baker does.” The law is incorrect in forcing a American to use his talents to support an institution he doesn’t believe in.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#2253 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you, gay activists and the government is trying to force a baker to, use his personal talents to provide a WEDDING cake to an institution of which he doesn’t support or agree with. What is a wedding to you? To the baker it only consists of a husband and wife.
No one cares if he supports or agrees with it. He's baking a cake, which is not against his religion.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#2254 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
No they don’t because your “ritual sacrifice” would impose your belief upon an innocent, removing their individual rights given by their Creator.
Not necessarily. They could be a willing sacrifice. I would still be arrested for murder though.

If you'd like another example, then how about my religion says I have to keep a filthy kitchen at my restaurant? Do public health code laws violate my freedom of religion by forcing me to clean my kitchen?
curious wrote:
My guess is you believe in Abortion under the guides of “woman’s right to choose” don’t you? Child sacrifice is real and legal in the USA and my guess is you support that without reservation. Do you really want to compare ripping babies from their mother’s womb to the non-sale of a WEDDING CAKE? No comparison.
I support abortion up to a point. Embryos and early stage fetuses are not people. So, yes, it is more important to me that people be free from discrimination than a non-person be kept alive.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2255 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hundreds of millions of Americans believe in traditional marriage…  Are you prepared to have government force all of them to believe as you through punishment?&#8232;
Are men and women not going to get married to each other anymore? Our government doesn't force anyone to believe anything. You are free to believe whatever you wish, even if it is unsupported, hysterical hyperbole. You are not free to violate the law and use religion as your defense.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2256 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
There is our First Amendment…  Which you all seem to ignore.
Evidently, you have an incorrect idea of what the First Amendment guarantees. Now where, oh where could one look to find out exactly how the First Amendment means? Who gets to determine what it means? SCOTUS does. The Court investigated the history of religious freedom in the United States and quoted a letter from Thomas Jefferson in which he wrote that there was a distinction between religious belief and action that flowed from religious belief. The former "lies solely between man and his God," therefore "the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions."

ACTIONS ONLY, and NOT OPINIONS

This was determined in 1878. Why are you just now discovering how our government works?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2257 Jun 13, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
No one cares if he supports or agrees with it. He's baking a cake, which is not against his religion.
“No one cares if he supports or agrees with it “ If that’s so true why to push to punish the baker?

“He's baking a cake, which is not against his religion.” He’s baking a wedding cake which he reserves to bake for husbands and wives, which is a part of his belief system.

Will you want to punish the gay graphic designer who is commissioned by the Westboro Baptist Church to make signs stating,“God hate fags”, or “gays will go to hell”?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2258 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
“They ignored the facts??????? Then why did the baker AGREE to all the findings of fact in this case? And what law did they ignore?”“The gay couple failed to sew Phillips individually before the statute of limitations expired” and “The division of civil rights never notified Phillips or the cake shop of the statute that he allegedly violated, never providing factual and legal basis, and was charged under the incorrect statute.” The Colorado Civil Liberties Commission called these legal facts “technicalities” in order to decide up their political bias.
 
“There's no law that says a businessman can use his religious beliefs as an excuse for breaking the law. Perhaps you have no idea what you're talking about.” The first Amendment. You don’t have to agree but the fact is the baker served gays all the time out of his shop.
So you are for government putting a American out of business in support of your belief. That’s sad.
Statute of limitations? Evidently the baker had a very poor lawyer if that is true. Perhaps there was an exception unique to this case.

How can you say the baker was never notified of the statute he violated and then say he was charged under the incorrect statute????

It seems you have gotten hold of some bad information.

By the way, this baker isn't out of business, so stop with the crazy talk.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2259 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Our First Amendment, provides protection for the baker, but because of your belief your goal is to put him out of business in favor of your belief... That’s not right and it’s unAmerican.
Once again, I urge you to explore what the First Amendment actually means, NOT what you think it means.

My belief and my goal was NOT to put this baker out of business. He did have the choice to stop discriminating against gays, but instead he chose the easy way..... no wedding cakes at all. That's fine with me. I don't care what he sells, as long as he follows the law.

Willfully breaking the law and trying to use religion as an excuse is what's un-American.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2260 Jun 13, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. They could be a willing sacrifice. I would still be arrested for murder though.
If you'd like another example, then how about my religion says I have to keep a filthy kitchen at my restaurant? Do public health code laws violate my freedom of religion by forcing me to clean my kitchen?
<quoted text>
I support abortion up to a point. Embryos and early stage fetuses are not people. So, yes, it is more important to me that people be free from discrimination than a non-person be kept alive.
“Not necessarily. They could be a willing sacrifice. I would still be arrested for murder though.” Your logic is off.

“If you'd like another example, then how about my religion says I have to keep a filthy kitchen at my restaurant? Do public health code laws violate my freedom of religion by forcing me to clean my kitchen?” You’re grasping for straws now… Maybe if you keep to the subject of the wedding cake? Or can’t you make an argument for that?

“I support abortion up to a point. Embryos and early stage fetuses are not people. So, yes, it is more important to me that people be free from discrimination than a non-person be kept alive.” Well there you go… Murder is okay because you make a definition of a “non-person” and even though the baker served gays everything else in his bakery to gays, when it’s a WEDDING cake you want government to punish him. So by your logic he can change the definition to “husband and wife cake” and that would NOT be considered discrimination.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2261 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
“No one cares if he supports or agrees with it “ If that’s so true why to push to punish the baker?
“He's baking a cake, which is not against his religion.” He’s baking a wedding cake which he reserves to bake for husbands and wives, which is a part of his belief system.
Will you want to punish the gay graphic designer who is commissioned by the Westboro Baptist Church to make signs stating,“God hate fags”, or “gays will go to hell”?
What words did the gay couple want displayed on their cake? Nothing. No words at all. Your analogy fails.

Since when is baking a cake part of a belief system?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2262 Jun 13, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Are men and women not going to get married to each other anymore? Our government doesn't force anyone to believe anything. You are free to believe whatever you wish, even if it is unsupported, hysterical hyperbole. You are not free to violate the law and use religion as your defense.
“Are men and women not going to get married to each other anymore?”…

“Our government doesn't force anyone to believe anything. You are free to believe whatever you wish, even if it is unsupported, hysterical hyperbole. You are not free to violate the law and use religion as your defense.”

I stand for freedom for ALL Americans making the argument it’s wrong to punish an American for when he/she believes and you stand for punishment for a baker who LITERALLY did NOTHING to the gay couple. That’s the difference between you and me.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2263 Jun 13, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidently, you have an incorrect idea of what the First Amendment guarantees. Now where, oh where could one look to find out exactly how the First Amendment means? Who gets to determine what it means? SCOTUS does. The Court investigated the history of religious freedom in the United States and quoted a letter from Thomas Jefferson in which he wrote that there was a distinction between religious belief and action that flowed from religious belief. The former "lies solely between man and his God," therefore "the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions."
ACTIONS ONLY, and NOT OPINIONS
This was determined in 1878. Why are you just now discovering how our government works?
Government forcing a American to use his talents to support something he doesn’t believe in is wrong and will have to go to SCOTUS to be decided… Why because your precedents don’t apply to these cases.

Keep arguing punishment to those who don’t believe as you do, and I’m sure you will get very far.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2264 Jun 13, 2014
Respect71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you, gay activists and the government is trying to force a baker to, use his personal talents to provide a WEDDING cake to an institution of which he doesn’t support or agree with. What is a wedding to you? To the baker it only consists of a husband and wife.
Actions only, not opinions........1878

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2265 Jun 13, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Statute of limitations? Evidently the baker had a very poor lawyer if that is true. Perhaps there was an exception unique to this case.
How can you say the baker was never notified of the statute he violated and then say he was charged under the incorrect statute????
It seems you have gotten hold of some bad information.
By the way, this baker isn't out of business, so stop with the crazy talk.
These are the FACTS of the case… You can deny them all you want.

More facts: I stand for freedom of ALL Americans while you continue to rail and desire government to punish those you don’t believe the same as you.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2266 Jun 13, 2014
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, I urge you to explore what the First Amendment actually means, NOT what you think it means.
My belief and my goal was NOT to put this baker out of business. He did have the choice to stop discriminating against gays, but instead he chose the easy way..... no wedding cakes at all. That's fine with me. I don't care what he sells, as long as he follows the law.
Willfully breaking the law and trying to use religion as an excuse is what's un-American.
More facts: He served gays all the time.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 3 min who cares 13,115
The NE Jade Wednesday Thread 7 min Phillip 1
News Politicians, Gay Rights Groups Calls on FDA to ... 9 min Hemophiliac 2
Which QUEER is the BIGGEST BIGOT? 11 min Voting1 2
News Sanders: Don't blame Islam for Orlando shooting 28 min ImFree2Choose 784
News Orlando Democrat: FDA should end ban on gay men... 42 min Gremlin 17
News Clock ticking, but tweaks in play for N. Caroli... 1 hr NOM s Waffle House 3
News Obama: Notion that being armed would have saved... 8 hr country 964
More from around the web