Oregon: Cake refusal violates gay cou...

Oregon: Cake refusal violates gay couple's rights

There are 57 comments on the SFGate story from Jan 17, 2014, titled Oregon: Cake refusal violates gay couple's rights. In it, SFGate reports that:

A suburban Portland bakery violated the civil rights of a same-sex couple by refusing to bake a cake for the women's wedding, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said Friday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at SFGate.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#22 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
"Perkins told me that in many cases gay couples are targeting businesses owned by Christians.
“Individuals are being persecuted and prosecuted using the leverage of the government through these homosexual activists,” he said.“Government has become a weapon that homosexual activists are using against Christian business owners.”"
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/21/chr...
---Seems like it.
Perkins + Fox News : Bigotry in Action

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#23 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
"The backlash against Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of the bakery, was severe. Gay rights groups launched protests and pickets outside the family’s store. They threatened wedding vendors who did business with the bakery. And, Klein told me, the family’s children were the targets of death threats."
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/21/chr...
---So much for thinking gays are civil.
Why should we be civil to bigots who try to discriminate against us?
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#24 Jan 22, 2014
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Not because they are "christian" (lots of us are one form of "christian" or another), but because they attack or discriminate against us.
Religious freedom comes in many flavors friend. There's more than one format of Christianity Einstein...hence Baptists, Protestants, Catholics, etc.

And no one "attacked" you by not baking a cake idiot. They merely were upholding their religious beliefs. They never stopped this couple from finding another cake.

These incidences of gays demanding everyone bake them a cake cross the line given those not wanting to bake a cake are only trying to hold on to their own freedoms in terms of religion.

The gays idea of 'discrimination' anymore includes everything from those looking at you sideways when you kiss to thinking anyone without a rainbow sticker on their car needs to be held accountable for some odd reason.

Leave those that don't agree with your marriages the hell alone as long as they're not stopping you. Pretty simple.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#25 Jan 22, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should we be civil to bigots who try to discriminate against us?
Let's look at that.

For one denying a cake to a gay couple based on religion is hardly a real form of 'discrimination'.

I mean really....talk about pushing it.

As in the Colorado case you've got one baker in a city of no doubt hundreds who wants to uphold their particular religious beliefs. Let them - they're allowing you to get married.

Not everyone should be required to abide by your belief system and hence you're allowed not to abide by theirs.

These bakers made no malicious attempts at trying to halt these gays' marriage nor did they call around to the other hundreds of bakers to halt them from getting a God damned cake.

If you want tolernace you in turn have to deliver it as well.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#26 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at that.
For one denying a cake to a gay couple based on religion is hardly a real form of 'discrimination'.
I mean really....talk about pushing it.
As in the Colorado case you've got one baker in a city of no doubt hundreds who wants to uphold their particular religious beliefs. Let them - they're allowing you to get married.
Not everyone should be required to abide by your belief system and hence you're allowed not to abide by theirs.
These bakers made no malicious attempts at trying to halt these gays' marriage nor did they call around to the other hundreds of bakers to halt them from getting a God damned cake.
If you want tolernace you in turn have to deliver it as well.
The same arguments were put forth in the 1960s against serving negroes. They didn't fly then, they sure as hell don't fly now.

As to your comment "they're allowing you to get married" that is pure bullshit.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#27 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Religious freedom comes in many flavors friend. There's more than one format of Christianity Einstein...hence Baptists, Protestants, Catholics, etc.
And no one "attacked" you by not baking a cake idiot. They merely were upholding their religious beliefs. They never stopped this couple from finding another cake.
These incidences of gays demanding everyone bake them a cake cross the line given those not wanting to bake a cake are only trying to hold on to their own freedoms in terms of religion.
The gays idea of 'discrimination' anymore includes everything from those looking at you sideways when you kiss to thinking anyone without a rainbow sticker on their car needs to be held accountable for some odd reason.
Leave those that don't agree with your marriages the hell alone as long as they're not stopping you. Pretty simple.
Nope, I think we'll simply enforce the anti-discrimination laws instead.

If you don't want to be convicted of discrimination, I'd suggest you stop discriminating against people.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#28 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at that.
For one denying a cake to a gay couple based on religion is hardly a real form of 'discrimination'.
I mean really....talk about pushing it.
As in the Colorado case you've got one baker in a city of no doubt hundreds who wants to uphold their particular religious beliefs. Let them - they're allowing you to get married.
Not everyone should be required to abide by your belief system and hence you're allowed not to abide by theirs.
These bakers made no malicious attempts at trying to halt these gays' marriage nor did they call around to the other hundreds of bakers to halt them from getting a God damned cake.
If you want tolernace you in turn have to deliver it as well.
According to the laws in Oregon it IS a "real form of discrimination".

If you don't like it, get the law changed.

Until then we will ensure the law is enforced.

No one is forced to open a bakery to the general public. If someone CHOOSES to do so, then they should expect to have to follow the law.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#29 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
If you want tolernace you in turn have to deliver it as well.
NO, according to the law in Oregon we DON'T have to tolerate discrimination.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#30 Jan 22, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
The same arguments were put forth in the 1960s against serving negroes. They didn't fly then, they sure as hell don't fly now.
As to your comment "they're allowing you to get married" that is pure bullshit.
I'll rubberstamp that bullshit friend.

And yes....gays are being allowed marriage at a growing rate.

Personally I too wish we could put that measure to rest and just let gays marriage nationwide within the year and have it done with rather than this state by state train we're on.

There's nothing wrong with having a minority of businesses not wanting to cater to gays based on religion though. By stating there is and forcing them to you in effect are also effectively practicing discrimination against their own freedoms.

Let the church nutters have their ability to live as they see fit friend and in turn you should as well.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#31 Jan 22, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, I think we'll simply enforce the anti-discrimination laws instead.
If you don't want to be convicted of discrimination, I'd suggest you stop discriminating against people.
Never have I discriminated against anyone liar.

And anti-discrimination laws in terms of religious belief(s) can be argued given religion itself IS a form of freedom.

Didn't think of THAT now did you liar???

LOL!!
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#32 Jan 22, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
NO, according to the law in Oregon we DON'T have to tolerate discrimination.
The real question is who is discriminating against who???

Had this been an intellectual discussion you could easily see religion in and by itself is a form OF liberty so in fact are we not stripping these bakers of their religious beliefs by advising them they can have faith in a religion but in turn cannot practice it??

HMMMMMMMM....makes you think...but of course your knee jerk reactionary self cannot.
Denver Dan

Sacramento, CA

#33 Jan 22, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the laws in Oregon it IS a "real form of discrimination".
If you don't like it, get the law changed.
Until then we will ensure the law is enforced.
No one is forced to open a bakery to the general public. If someone CHOOSES to do so, then they should expect to have to follow the law.
Laws don't always follow the correct course.

Laws against gay marriage for one....you can easily see how those laws are inadequate. But how odd it is your special interests blind you to those laws that don't service freedoms for others.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#34 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll rubberstamp that bullshit friend.
And yes....gays are being allowed marriage at a growing rate.
Personally I too wish we could put that measure to rest and just let gays marriage nationwide within the year and have it done with rather than this state by state train we're on.
There's nothing wrong with having a minority of businesses not wanting to cater to gays based on religion though. By stating there is and forcing them to you in effect are also effectively practicing discrimination against their own freedoms.
Let the church nutters have their ability to live as they see fit friend and in turn you should as well.
If you allow that, then a minority of businesses would decide not to cater to blacks or women or even Christians or Jews.

The problem is when you go down that road, you can't prevent a MAJORITY of businesses from engaging in the same type of discrimination. That's how we ended up needing the Civil Rights Act in the first place.

We're called minorities for a reason; without legal protections we're at the whim of the majority.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#35 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Never have I discriminated against anyone liar.
And anti-discrimination laws in terms of religious belief(s) can be argued given religion itself IS a form of freedom.
Didn't think of THAT now did you liar???
LOL!!
Of course I thought of that, but not everyone believes in the same form of religion, and who's to say WHICH religious beliefs take precedent?

Can't I claim religious freedom in discriminating against those I don't like as well?

Why yes I can.

And that's the problem when you start down that road.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#36 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The real question is who is discriminating against who???
Had this been an intellectual discussion you could easily see religion in and by itself is a form OF liberty so in fact are we not stripping these bakers of their religious beliefs by advising them they can have faith in a religion but in turn cannot practice it??
HMMMMMMMM....makes you think...but of course your knee jerk reactionary self cannot.
The law is pretty clear it was the baker in this case who was guilty of discriminating.

I can just as easily claim the gay couple's religious liberty was being stripped as well.

That's the problem; when you have 2 competing religious liberties which one wins?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#37 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Laws don't always follow the correct course.
Laws against gay marriage for one....you can easily see how those laws are inadequate. But how odd it is your special interests blind you to those laws that don't service freedoms for others.
So work to change the laws as we did with marriage laws.

Allowing a baker to refuse service to a same-sex couple doesn't service that same-sex couple's freedoms either.

Again it comes down to competing liberties, and whose takes precedent.

History has shown us what happens when a majority is allowed to refuse service to a minority group, which is exactly why these anti-discrimination laws were passed.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#42 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Never have I discriminated against anyone liar.
And anti-discrimination laws in terms of religious belief(s) can be argued given religion itself IS a form of freedom.
Didn't think of THAT now did you liar???
LOL!!
The Supremes will decide sooner or later. If they allow discrimination in the marketplace because of religion we might as well join the Muslims with their sharia law. That's what we'll end up with.

The old, give them an inch saying comes to mind. Maybe I'll get a nice 20 year old Mexican man as a slave.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#43 Jan 22, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
The Supremes will decide sooner or later. If they allow discrimination in the marketplace because of religion we might as well join the Muslims with their sharia law. That's what we'll end up with.
The old, give them an inch saying comes to mind. Maybe I'll get a nice 20 year old Mexican man as a slave.
Well if the Supremes DO end up allowing businesses to discriminate, then I'm opening a business just so I can discriminate against fundy Christians.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#47 Jan 22, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Religious freedom comes in many flavors friend. There's more than one format of Christianity Einstein...hence Baptists, Protestants, Catholics, etc.
And no one "attacked" you by not baking a cake idiot. They merely were upholding their religious beliefs. They never stopped this couple from finding another cake.
These incidences of gays demanding everyone bake them a cake cross the line given those not wanting to bake a cake are only trying to hold on to their own freedoms in terms of religion.
The gays idea of 'discrimination' anymore includes everything from those looking at you sideways when you kiss to thinking anyone without a rainbow sticker on their car needs to be held accountable for some odd reason.
Leave those that don't agree with your marriages the hell alone as long as they're not stopping you. Pretty simple.
And nobody stopped those AfricanAmericans from sitting at another lunch counter, or buying their own buses so they could sit in the front of them.

For a great many in the South, racial segregation and anti-miscegenation are religious tenets.

To be honest, I don't like these cases. But Laws have teeth. Sometimes they bite if one doesn't heed the bark.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#50 Jan 23, 2014
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll rubberstamp that bullshit friend.
And yes....gays are being allowed marriage at a growing rate.
Personally I too wish we could put that measure to rest and just let gays marriage nationwide within the year and have it done with rather than this state by state train we're on.
I have to agree with you here.
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>There's nothing wrong with having a minority of businesses not wanting to cater to gays based on religion though. By stating there is and forcing them to you in effect are also effectively practicing discrimination against their own freedoms.
And that is where society gets to decide on the limits of individual freedoms. Society in this nation has decided that an individual can not use their personal religious freedoms as an excuse to practice religious discrimination in laws governing public accommodations. You almost explained the issue correctly in your last sentence
Denver Dan wrote:
<quoted text>Let the church nutters have their ability to live as they see fit friend and in turn you should as well.
The issue is "Let the church nutters have their ability to PRACTICE THEIR BELIEFS IN PRIVATE as they see fit friend and in turn you should as well."

The trolley business owner in Maryland did the right thing. These people can do the same. Stop doing weddings. That way they insure they are not condoning weddings that may not be in line with their beliefs.

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.

Transgender Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 12 min Pietro Armando 8,766
News Transgender clinic opens 29 min Dave 39
lookin for top jeddah (Jul '10) 4 hr Fguy 2,045
I want a girlfriend or a friend from Jeddah (May '13) 5 hr arsalan 36
where guys and gays hangout in jeddah (Sep '10) 7 hr maher 1,851
Jubail gays expat (Sep '13) 9 hr pash jubail 149
looking for gay contacts in jeddah (Mar '14) 10 hr Abumohammad000786 87
More from around the web