Sweet Cakes by Melissa violated same-sex couple's civil rights when it refused to make wedding cake, state finds

[Luis Gonzalez]

Exactly, Luis.

Except "Ladies Nite" when they can get 50% off alcohol.   

or

Senior citizen pricing providing discounts.

Positive discrimination seems to be socially acceptable.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Why not? I should, for example, be obliged to make and carve an altar for a Satanic cult? Someone comes in and asks me for one, I'll send them to a colleague who doesn't mind doing that. He gets the money, they get what they want, I get to keep my peace of mind.

Your business is licensed by the State, and there are laws that govern how you conduct that business.

Those laws do not apply to your behavior as an individual, but then again, you need no licensing to be an individual.

Would the world be a better place if we all generally lived and let live?

Absolutely.

Then again, "our side" is not good at that either.

[EC]

Your business is licensed by the State, and there are laws that govern how you conduct that business.

Those laws do not apply to your behavior as an individual, but then again, you need no licensing to be an individual.

Would the world be a better place if we all generally lived and let live?

Absolutely.

Then again, "our side" is not good at that either.

I do sometimes ponder that. Obama wasn't lying (for once) when he did the famous "you didn't build that" statement.
I built my business from scratch to the dizzying heights of 5 employees and steady, though rarely spectacularly profitable work coming in. Look at it - I am proud of it.
Then I look at the filing cabinets. There are 4 in the office. One holds 10 years worth of contracts, invoices, cheque stubs, letters from happy clients, two court cases from unhappy clients. The other three hold inspection reports, incident reports, mandatory paperwork, local council inspections, customs and excise investigations, 17 police reports, tax assessments, VAT paperwork, health and safety guidelines, food hygiene certificates (we don't even sell food), export licences, import licences, the list goes on and on.

I sort of wonder who's business it is.

[musiclady]

To make a comparison between the civil rights of African-Americans and the 'rights' of homosexuals is, IMO, a hideous inequity.

There is no "civil right" that should force us to support what we know from Scripture is morally reprehensible.

There is NO parallel between the Civil Rights movement and the bullying of homosexual groups against Christians.

[Charlespg]

My oh my!  you debate just like a liberal.

But to answer your question in a word?  Yes!

is name calling your answer?? ,they didn't refuse to serve these two bleep ,they just said they would not bake them a  wedding cake ,why should people be forced to approve of the gay life style? could not these  two queers just said ok and just gone to another bakery? this is an attempt by liberals and the gay mafia to run Christians out of business..sure as hell don't see them targeting Hindus,Muslims or Jews with this demand to"act against your Christian beliefs and bake us a wedding cake ,take pictures at a fag wedding  ect BS

[Charlespg]

To make a comparison between the civil rights of African-Americans and the 'rights' of homosexuals is, IMO, a hideous inequity.

There is no "civil right" that should force us to support what we know from Scripture is morally reprehensible.

There is NO parallel between the Civil Rights movement and the bullying of homosexual groups against Christians.

thank you ..the queers and their enablers are demanding we approve of their lifestyle ,BIG difference between  that and not serving somebody because their black or a jew

[Luis Gonzalez]

I do sometimes ponder that. Obama wasn't lying (for once) when he did the famous "you didn't build that" statement.
I built my business from scratch to the dizzying heights of 5 employees and steady, though rarely spectacularly profitable work coming in. Look at it - I am proud of it.
Then I look at the filing cabinets. There are 4 in the office. One holds 10 years worth of contracts, invoices, cheque stubs, letters from happy clients, two court cases from unhappy clients. The other three hold inspection reports, incident reports, mandatory paperwork, local council inspections, customs and excise investigations, 17 police reports, tax assessments, VAT paperwork, health and safety guidelines, food hygiene certificates (we don't even sell food), export licences, import licences, the list goes on and on.

I sort of wonder who's business it is.

It's your business, but it is a business.

We are overtly regulated, but then again, having no regulations at all is perhaps just as bad as having too many regulations.

It's the Paradox of tolerance. It's Karl Popper's argument that a tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, because tolerating intolerance will inevitably lead to the end of all tolerance.

As a society, we're constantly seeking to maintain that balance.

[Charlespg]

It's your business, but it is a business.

We are overtly regulated, but then again, having no regulations at all is perhaps just as bad as having too many regulations.

It's the Paradox of tolerance. It's Karl Popper's argument that a tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, because tolerating intolerance will inevitably lead to the end of all tolerance.

As a society, we're constantly seeking to maintain that balance.

Good then the queers and  their supporters need to show tolerance as well ,go to another business and stop forcing approval of your perversion on the rest of us ..this is one of the main reasons I despise bleep

[DCPatriot]

is name calling your answer?? ,they didn't refuse to serve these two bleep ,they just said they would not bake them a  wedding cake ,why should people be forced to approve of the gay life style? could not these  two queers just said ok and just gone to another bakery? this is an attempt by liberals and the gay mafia to run Christians out of business..sure as hell don't see them targeting Hindus,Muslims or Jews with this demand to"act against your Christian beliefs and bake us a wedding cake ,take pictures at a fag wedding  ect BS

That's rich, Charlespq.....accusing me of name calling, when in virtually all your posts in this thread refer to homosexuals in degrading fashion as "bleep" and "queers".

Thanks for playing.   

Oh.....and baking a wedding cake for a customer doesn't translate that one approves of the gay lifestyle.  But you know that already.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Good then the queers and  their supporters need to show tolerance as well ,go to another business and stop forcing approval of your perversion on the rest of us ..this is one of the main reasons I despise bleep

I no more "enable" anyone's homosexuality than I do your ignorance.

I prefer intelligent debate, so off to the ignore pile with you.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That's rich, Charlespq.....accusing me of name calling, when in virtually all your posts in this thread refer to homosexuals in degrading fashion as "bleep" and "queers".

Thanks for playing.   

Oh.....and baking a wedding cake for a customer doesn't translate that one approves of the gay lifestyle.  But you know that already.

The pertinent issue here is Oregon State Law.

Oregon law bans discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in jobs and in places that serve the public, such as restaurants and bakeries.

The 2007 law provides an exemption for religious organizations and parochial schools but does not allow private business owners to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

If you don't like a law, you can either change it, or ignore it.

If you choose to go the route of civil disobedience, be ready to face the consequences of such actions.

P.S. It appears that according to Oregon law, churches can't be forced to perform same-sex weddings and parochial schools do not have to hire openly homosexual teachers. 

[musiclady]

thank you ..the queers and their enablers are demanding we approve of their lifestyle ,BIG difference between  that and not serving somebody because their black or a jew

Calling the approval of homosexual lifestyles the same thing as allowing blacks to eat at lunch counters, go to the same bathrooms, drink from the same water fountains, and not get beaten or lynched is, as I said before, a false and hideous comparison.

It is relatively equal to calling the murder of the unborn a woman's "choice."

The left controls the language, and they control the thought of the masses.

They were able to persuade a large number of people to believe that murdering the unborn is good for women, and they are working on persuading the majority of Americans that denying Biblical faith is required by law.

It is most certainly not.

[jmyrlefuller]

I think there is a fundamental error here, in treating it as a freedom of speech/freedom of religion case.

Both sides have equal freedom of speech and freedom of religion - so how do you balance it out? Here in the UK (and throughout Europe) we have two well tested rights in common law that the founders never bothered to list - most likely because they were so self evident they decided to save ink.

Freedom of association and freedom of movement.

In my business, I have the right to refuse service to anyone at any time for any or no reason. They have the complimentary right to not pay me for my services if they find my policies offensive or me personally offensive.

It's a more sensible way, and keeps clutter out of the court system.

I almost mentioned the 13th Amendment (best known as the abolition of slavery amendment): the concept of involuntary servitude. That amendment bars people from being forced to serve someone else unless a crime has been committed and that servitude is punishment for the crime.

As no crime has been committed here, it would be hard to argue that Melissa must serve the same-sex couple.

Now... as for the argument that Oceander and Luis have brought up: that somehow, by acquiring a business license, the state has the authority to make you surrender your right to free exercise (or, in theory, any other right) in exchange for that license.

That's the concept of implied consent. It's best known for its role in driving privileges; the state makes you surrender certain aspects of your Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. If you plead the fifth when the police officer wants to alcohol test you, they can immediately take away your license, even if you are innocent. The difference, of course, is that the state owns the roads. Because it is their property, they have right to dictate what goes on on their land. The case for implied consent there is much stronger than the case of requiring one to surrender one's rights in exchange for a business license.

[EC]

Calling the approval of homosexual lifestyles the same thing as allowing blacks to eat at lunch counters, go to the same bathrooms, drink from the same water fountains, and not get beaten or lynched is, as I said before, a false and hideous comparison.

It is relatively equal to calling the murder of the unborn a woman's "choice."

The left controls the language, and they control the thought of the masses.

They were able to persuade a large number of people to believe that murdering the unborn is good for women, and they are working on persuading the majority of Americans that denying Biblical faith is required by law.

It is most certainly not.

I got to admit - I am strongly in favor of homosexuals not getting beaten or lynched as well. Maybe you don't have it there, but here there is a charming custom called gay bashing. It's sort of like the knock out game, but targeted at homosexuals, and outgrowth of the Paki bashing so beloved by the National Front.

[Luis Gonzalez]

As no crime has been committed here, it would be hard to argue that Melissa must serve the same-sex couple.

Oregon laws specifically ban businesses from refusing services due to sexual orientation.

It is a hard case to make that a law has not been broken when one fails to comply with a law.

[musiclady]

I got to admit - I am strongly in favor of homosexuals not getting beaten or lynched as well. Maybe you don't have it there, but here there is a charming custom called gay bashing. It's sort of like the knock out game, but targeted at homosexuals, and outgrowth of the Paki bashing so beloved by the National Front.

NO one is arguing that homosexuals should be beaten or lynched, but that is NOT happening here.  There was universal discrimination against blacks, that not only included the two extremes that you quoted (and interestingly failed to mention the other things on the list), but universal inequality in the American South where blacks were separated and treated badly across the board.

There is absolutely NO PARALLEL in what is going on here with the homosexual activist/bullies.

What is happening here is that the bakery owners are being forced to approve of IMMORAL behavior and supporting what they find morally reprehensible.

There is no parallel with the American Civil Rights movement and blacks.

NONE.

[EC]

There is absolutely NO PARALLEL in what is going on here with the homosexual activist/bullies.

What is happening here is that the bakery owners are being forced to approve of IMMORAL behavior and supporting what they find morally reprehensible.

There is no parallel with the American Civil Rights movement and blacks.

NONE.

Oh, I am not disagreeing. There is no comparison at all. You can't tell someone is a homosexual by looking at them - they have to tell you. Being dark skinned (or a woman, to go back a century or so) on the other hand, is usually pretty obvious.

I am tempter to pull your leg slightly, but respect you far too much to do so. 

[Luis Gonzalez]

I got to admit - I am strongly in favor of homosexuals not getting beaten or lynched as well. Maybe you don't have it there, but here there is a charming custom called gay bashing. It's sort of like the knock out game, but targeted at homosexuals, and outgrowth of the Paki bashing so beloved by the National Front.

We have individual rights. We also have licensed businesses that are governed by commerce laws.

The laws of the State of Oregon make it illegal for businesses to deny service or goods to customers based on a number of criteria, with sexual orientation being one of the criteria.

That law has been in effect since 2007, so businesses operating in 2013 are supposed to be aware of that law, and have the right to not be in business as a result of it.

That law does not force me to condone the activity or lifestyle as an individual, but my business does not enjoy First Amendment rights because business entities do not hold religious beliefs.

These laws may very well be impacted by whatever decision the SCOTUS arrives at in the Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters cases, but I don't know if those cases fully relate to this specific issue.

All these issues should be worked out in the laboratory of the States, as they were intended to be.

[musiclady]

Oh, I am not disagreeing. There is no comparison at all. You can't tell someone is a homosexual by looking at them - they have to tell you. Being dark skinned (or a woman, to go back a century or so) on the other hand, is usually pretty obvious.

I am tempter to pull your leg slightly, but respect you far too much to do so. 

The bigger difference is that being black or darker skinned has nothing to do with sin.

Homosexual behavior does, and homosexual "marriage" is SIN.

If the state forces a business person to condone (what Scripture clearly states is) sin, then it is a direct affront to religious freedom.

And even if you don't agree with the people who still hold to Biblical beliefs, the religious beliefs of Christians have got to be permitted.

There can be no law against them.

[Charlespg]

That's rich, Charlespq.....accusing me of name calling, when in virtually all your posts in this thread refer to homosexuals in degrading fashion as "bleep" and "bleep".

Thanks for playing.   

Oh.....and baking a wedding cake for a customer doesn't translate that one approves of the gay lifestyle.  But you know that already.

if I 'm forced to bake wedding  cakes for people whose lifestyle I find offensive thats forced approval ..let the gays go to a bakery that caters to gays
..and again why are just Christian business being targeted ..because the gays  and liberals want to forced approval   Oh and I'd   be a lot less hateful of gays or queers if they would stop trying to force approval of their life style .. I'd don't care what they do behind closed doors but I support the right of folks to disapprove  and forcing businesses   to provide services to gay wedding is  against our  religious liberty...and my disapproval is philosophical as well as Christian

[Charlespg]

The bigger difference is that being black or darker skinned has nothing to do with sin.

Homosexual behavior does, and homosexual "marriage" is SIN.

If the state forces a business person to condone (what Scripture clearly states is) sin, then it is a direct affront to religious freedom.

And even if you don't agree with the people who still hold to Biblical beliefs, the religious beliefs of Christians have got to be permitted.

There can be no law against them.

as I said I don't see non Christian businesses that refuse to  provide wedding services to gays being targeted ..let the free market do what it does and let those who want to cater gay weddings have their businesses and those who don't want to cater to gay weddings have theirs 

[Atomic Cow]

as I said I don't see non Christian businesses that refuse to  provide wedding services to gays being targeted ..let the free market do what it does and let those who want to cater gay weddings have their businesses and those who don't want to cater to gay weddings have theirs 

Won't happen.  This is about forced acceptance, by the barrel of the government gun if needed.

Sad that people who post on a conservative forum support violating people's 1st amendment rights.

[Charlespg]

Won't happen.  This is about forced acceptance, by the barrel of the government gun if needed.

Sad that people who post on a conservative forum support violating people's 1st amendment rights.

nothing  consecutive or libertarian about it 

[DCPatriot]

if I 'm forced to bake wedding  cakes for people whose lifestyle I find offensive thats forced approval ..let the gays go to a bakery that caters to gays
..and again why are just Christian business being targeted ..because the gays  and liberals want to forced approval   Oh and I'd   be a lot less hateful of gays or bleep if they would stop trying to force approval of their life style .. I'd don't care what they do behind closed doors but I support the right of folks to disapprove  and forcing businesses   to provide services to gay wedding is  against our  religious liberty...and my disapproval is philosophical as well as Christian

I fail to see where it says the bakery "was targeted", because they were Christian.

If more than one of my acquaintances told me that so and so was the best bakery, I'd go there....or I would simply inquire at my local deli. 

Now...if they happened to be owned by said defendants...it would depend on my nature to go after them legally if they refused to do business with me.

But...as anybody who has ever been on the wrong side of a Type-A  homosexual can attest....they don't let up.   

[musiclady]

as I said I don't see non Christian businesses that refuse to  provide wedding services to gays being targeted ..let the free market do what it does and let those who want to cater gay weddings have their businesses and those who don't want to cater to gay weddings have theirs 

Free market........................ what a concept!

Too bad the thugs in charge of this country don't believe in it.