Christian bakers who refused cake order for gay wedding forced to close shop

[Mainstreeter]

I agree with Noomi. No one wants to do business with bigots.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Cake Wars: Asking Shops Who Denied Gays Cakes What Cakes They'll Make

Didn't even bother to see it was from a story from the LOCAL Portland paper, did you?

lol. You cite the Moonie Times as Gospel, but the local newspaper reporter in Portland, naw...gotta be lyin'.

Show me any cake mentioned in the linked article that had to be assembled at the customer location or even delivered to the customer location, and you might have a point.

Show me any evidence that the gay couple was ever refused an order that they could pick up at the bakery. That they were EVER refused an order at the bakery which apparently they went to regularly for products.

The owners never said anything about delivering the cake. They said they would not bake a cake for same sex weddings.

This is just getting ridiculous now.

Poor connies. Ever the victims. When the story doesn't match, just make it up on the fly to perpetuate more victimhood.

Sounds like the victim here is you. You remind me of black folks who cry "RACIST!" when they don't get their way. Not looking good for you at all.

 

[Asclepias]

Now for those of you who seem to have no eyes in your skulls, or selective sight, watch this video:

Did a baker break the law when he denied service to same-sex couple? | Business | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon

He had religious symbols, and faith based decorations all over his shop. So how could this couple have known? It was in front of their very eyes. They knew what they were getting themselves into when they came there.

Why would it occur to someone that because someone believes in God they are also homophobic? I dont get the connection. I know plenty of people that belive in God and have no issue with gay people other than to disagree with their lifestyle.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I agree with Noomi. No one wants to do business with bigots.

And whose sock are you?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now for those of you who seem to have no eyes in your skulls, or selective sight, watch this video:

Did a baker break the law when he denied service to same-sex couple? | Business | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon

He had religious symbols, and faith based decorations all over his shop. So how could this couple have known? It was in front of their very eyes. They knew what they were getting themselves into when they came there.

Why would it occur to someone that because someone believes in God they are also homophobic? I dont get the connection. I know plenty of people that belive in God and have no issue with gay people other than to disagree with their lifestyle.

It is because we believe in God that we are seen as homophobic. I have no issue with homosexuals as far as the person is concerned, but I will not capitulate the tenets of my faith to beck to the every whim of theirs that I see as sinful. If marriage is about devotion, so is my faith. I am devoted to my Lord God and his ways, and I will not stray from him for the likes of anyone.

 

[Asclepias]

Now for those of you who seem to have no eyes in your skulls, or selective sight, watch this video:

Did a baker break the law when he denied service to same-sex couple? | Business | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon

He had religious symbols, and faith based decorations all over his shop. So how could this couple have known? It was in front of their very eyes. They knew what they were getting themselves into when they came there.

You must assume every Christian who advertises their faith on the wall is a bigot willing to break the law in serving people equally.

I see.

It will be a sad day when we equate being a Christian with being a member of the KKK. I just dont get how being a Christian should warn a gay person that they will be discriminated against.

 

[Asclepias]

Now for those of you who seem to have no eyes in your skulls, or selective sight, watch this video:

Did a baker break the law when he denied service to same-sex couple? | Business | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weather and Breaking News - Portland, Oregon

He had religious symbols, and faith based decorations all over his shop. So how could this couple have known? It was in front of their very eyes. They knew what they were getting themselves into when they came there.

Why would it occur to someone that because someone believes in God they are also homophobic? I dont get the connection. I know plenty of people that belive in God and have no issue with gay people other than to disagree with their lifestyle.

It is because we believe in God that we are seen as homophobic. I have no issue with homosexuals as far as the person is concerned, but I will not capitulate the tenets of my faith to beck to the every whim of theirs that I see as sinful. If marriage is about devotion, so is my faith. I am devoted to my Lord God and his ways, and I will not stray from him for the likes of anyone.

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

 

[hortysir]

Why would it occur to someone that because someone believes in God they are also homophobic? I dont get the connection. I know plenty of people that belive in God and have no issue with gay people other than to disagree with their lifestyle.

It is because we believe in God that we are seen as homophobic. I have no issue with homosexuals as far as the person is concerned, but I will not capitulate the tenets of my faith to beck to the every whim of theirs that I see as sinful. If marriage is about devotion, so is my faith. I am devoted to my Lord God and his ways, and I will not stray from him for the likes of anyone.

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

You have nothing to fear.
Idiocy isn't a sin.

We have ALL sinned.
The 'trick' is to not REPEAT that sinful behavior

 

[Mertex]

>


Interesting. I never heard that boycotts were "evil" during all the years the AFA was calling for all types of boycotts for gay friendly businesses.

Now that a boycott has occurred supporting a gay couple, suddenly it's "evil".



Wow how time change.



>>>>

Well, that's Republican/conservatives for you. When they do it, it is okay, when someone else does it, (especially if it goes against their policies), then it is not okay.

I bet there won't be a post claiming that AFA is "evil" for it's boycotts.

Supporters of the American Family Association, a conservative non-profit organization whose mission is to "promote the Biblical ethic of decency in American society," are not going be Googling much. Or using Android phones. Or browsing with Chrome. Or checking their Gmail. Or, well, you get the idea.

American Family Association Calls For Boycott Of Google Over Company's Support Of LGBT Rights (VIDEO)



The American Family Association, whose earlier boycott of Ford Motor Co. over its promotion of homosexuality was dropped after company sales fell 8 percent per month for two years, now is asking consumers to stop buying Big Macs and Happy Meals at McDonald’s.
Read more at ?Gay? McDonald?s prompts boycott

?Gay? McDonald?s prompts boycott

 

[Papageorgio]

Well the people applauding their demise are constantly using the phrase 'boycott' but you're right. It wasn't a boycott, even though an organized boycott of a business purely because you don't like the opinions of the owner, is evil. Those condoning the demise of the business are condoning the most hateful rhetoric and threats and justify it because the owners of the business are bigots.

Well who isn't bigoted about somethng? I daresay anybody who says he isn't is a liar. And a free people are allowed to be as bigoted as they want to be with impunity. The law says they are not allowed to impose their bigotry in a way that violates the unalienable rights of another. And that is a just law. But just to be bigoted? That is also an unalienable right.

But if we can be destroyed simply because we are politically incorrect, that is pure evil. And this is no longer America.

It was a boycott. Nobody boycotted "purely because you don't like the opinions of the owner", they boycotted because the owners took it that extra step of physically denying service to customers for no other reason then they were homos.

Nobody is endorsing hateful rhetoric and threats (if indeed they did happen), you just made that up because you're argument is weak and you needed some sensationalizing to breath some life into it.

Yeah, that's the pt. You cannot logically disagree with a boycott, regardless of how you feel about this issue or any other issue. If a store sells playboy, for example, people can boycott. If a store actively says they welcome GLBT, people can boycott. Everyone has free speech and right to patronize whomever they wish.

Personally, I find the state anti-discrimination laws to be more govt than i wish. However, I also think Lester Maddux had a right to choose not to serve African Americans, even though I personnally would never buy anything from such a person. However, state anti-discrimination laws are the law, and my personal opinion is irrelevant, except to disinguish the laws effect on christian bakers from the boycott's effect.

If businesses would put out signs that tells us they refuse to service certain people, I'd be all for that. Then when I see the sign, I can make my choice and not go in there or do business with them. That would probably be to easy though.

 

[bendog]

It is because we believe in God that we are seen as homophobic. I have no issue with homosexuals as far as the person is concerned, but I will not capitulate the tenets of my faith to beck to the every whim of theirs that I see as sinful. If marriage is about devotion, so is my faith. I am devoted to my Lord God and his ways, and I will not stray from him for the likes of anyone.

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

You have nothing to fear.
Idiocy isn't a sin.

We have ALL sinned.
The 'trick' is to not REPEAT that sinful behavior

Ah, but that's the rub. If a GLBT person finds homosexuality not a sin, can a person who sees it as a sin treat the GLBT as a sinner w/o the GLBT responding in kind?

 

[RKMBrown]

Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.
...

Where the hell do you guys keep coming up with this? They HAD to deliver?

You guys are flying off your pants now making shit up. Stop it.

The owner didn't even let them get that far. You have NO WAY to know if they even intended to pick it up or not.

The minute they told them it was for a same sex wedding, the bakers said they wouldn't do it, and the "abominations" spewed forth.

No. They said they didn't do same sex weddings. And the one line you keep citing was certainly not all there was to the conversation, now was it? The gay couple definitely wanted a wedding cake that the bakers would have had to assemble at the reception hall. Otherwise, they would have gotten their cake at the bakers as would any other customer. As that very same gay couple had always received service at the same bakery.

Until you can show me proof that there was any other scenario, I will stand by my opinion on this.

To intentionally destroy a person's livelihood purely because you don't share their beliefs or convictions is pure bigotry, is unAmerican, and is evil.

What was their livelihood baking cakes or refusing service to gays. They were boycotted for the later not the former. Boycotting is a time honored tradition in America. As is ignoring boycotts. Yet here you are accusing the people who were raped, of their civil rights by these bigots, as not having the courtesy to pretend they enjoyed being raped by these bigots. WOW just WOW

 

[RKMBrown]

It was a boycott. Nobody boycotted "purely because you don't like the opinions of the owner", they boycotted because the owners took it that extra step of physically denying service to customers for no other reason then they were homos.

Nobody is endorsing hateful rhetoric and threats (if indeed they did happen), you just made that up because you're argument is weak and you needed some sensationalizing to breath some life into it.

Yeah, that's the pt. You cannot logically disagree with a boycott, regardless of how you feel about this issue or any other issue. If a store sells playboy, for example, people can boycott. If a store actively says they welcome GLBT, people can boycott. Everyone has free speech and right to patronize whomever they wish.

Personally, I find the state anti-discrimination laws to be more govt than i wish. However, I also think Lester Maddux had a right to choose not to serve African Americans, even though I personnally would never buy anything from such a person. However, state anti-discrimination laws are the law, and my personal opinion is irrelevant, except to disinguish the laws effect on christian bakers from the boycott's effect.

If businesses would put out signs that tells us they refuse to service certain people, I'd be all for that. Then when I see the sign, I can make my choice and not go in there or do business with them. That would probably be to easy though.

Yeah sure, no shirt, no shoes, black, or gay = no service. Yeah that might have gone over well in the sixties.

 

[Katzndogz]

Refusing to participate in a same sex wedding isn't rape. If you want to use rape, the Christians forced to participate in a same sex wedding against their will were spiritually raped.

 

[Mertex]

Cake Wars: Asking Shops Who Denied Gays Cakes What Cakes They'll Make

Didn't even bother to see it was from a story from the LOCAL Portland paper, did you?

lol. You cite the Moonie Times as Gospel, but the local newspaper reporter in Portland, naw...gotta be lyin'.

Show me any cake mentioned in the linked article that had to be assembled at the customer location or even delivered to the customer location, and you might have a point.

Show me any evidence that the gay couple was ever refused an order that they could pick up at the bakery. That they were EVER refused an order at the bakery which apparently they went to regularly for products.

The owners never said anything about delivering the cake. They said they would not bake a cake for same sex weddings.

This is just getting ridiculous now.

Poor connies. Ever the victims. When the story doesn't match, just make it up on the fly to perpetuate more victimhood.

You are right, it was all about not wanting to bake the cake for them, had nothing to do with delivering it. Also, it was about what he called them. Insulted them to their face.

So much for hating the sin and not the sinner. He could have told them "he" believed their relationship was an abomination, not that they were an abomination.


Klein apologized to the women and told them he and his wife do not make cakes for same-sex marriages. Klein said the women were disgusted and walked out.
One of the women filed a complaint on January 28– also saying Klein referred to them as “abominations unto the Lord”– and now the Oregon Attorney General’s civil enforcement officers are investigating the claim.
Oregon Baker Faces State Investigation After Refusing to Make Same-Sex Couple?s Wedding Cake | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[hortysir]

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

You have nothing to fear.
Idiocy isn't a sin.

We have ALL sinned.
The 'trick' is to not REPEAT that sinful behavior

Ah, but that's the rub. If a GLBT person finds homosexuality not a sin, can a person who sees it as a sin treat the GLBT as a sinner w/o the GLBT responding in kind?

I love my nieces to pieces
They know that I feel it's all between them and Him

I don't "treat them" as sinners. maybe twice we've had the discussion about it being a sin.
I would never lock them (or anyone else) out for it

 

[Katzndogz]

5

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

You have nothing to fear.
Idiocy isn't a sin.

We have ALL sinned.
The 'trick' is to not REPEAT that sinful behavior

Ah, but that's the rub. If a GLBT person finds homosexuality not a sin, can a person who sees it as a sin treat the GLBT as a sinner w/o the GLBT responding in kind?

A true Christian would not judge the GLBT person as a sinner but only their own conduct in relation to the GLBT person. Just as the baker did.

Should a GLBT person have the power to force some unwilling person into committing a personal sin just because it entertains them?

 

[Mertex]

It was a boycott. Nobody boycotted "purely because you don't like the opinions of the owner", they boycotted because the owners took it that extra step of physically denying service to customers for no other reason then they were homos.

Nobody is endorsing hateful rhetoric and threats (if indeed they did happen), you just made that up because you're argument is weak and you needed some sensationalizing to breath some life into it.

Yeah, that's the pt. You cannot logically disagree with a boycott, regardless of how you feel about this issue or any other issue. If a store sells playboy, for example, people can boycott. If a store actively says they welcome GLBT, people can boycott. Everyone has free speech and right to patronize whomever they wish.

Personally, I find the state anti-discrimination laws to be more govt than i wish. However, I also think Lester Maddux had a right to choose not to serve African Americans, even though I personnally would never buy anything from such a person. However, state anti-discrimination laws are the law, and my personal opinion is irrelevant, except to disinguish the laws effect on christian bakers from the boycott's effect.

If businesses would put out signs that tells us they refuse to service certain people, I'd be all for that. Then when I see the sign, I can make my choice and not go in there or do business with them. That would probably be to easy though.

If the homosexuals didn't pay taxes, you might have a point, but they do, and they contribute to the benefits that businesses utilize, ergo, the businesses have no reason to refuse service to them because they are homosexual.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why would it occur to someone that because someone believes in God they are also homophobic? I dont get the connection. I know plenty of people that belive in God and have no issue with gay people other than to disagree with their lifestyle.

It is because we believe in God that we are seen as homophobic. I have no issue with homosexuals as far as the person is concerned, but I will not capitulate the tenets of my faith to beck to the every whim of theirs that I see as sinful. If marriage is about devotion, so is my faith. I am devoted to my Lord God and his ways, and I will not stray from him for the likes of anyone.

But all you have to do is not be gay and youre pretty much covered right?

How asinine. Were you not even reading my comment?

 

[Alfalfa]

Refusing to participate in a same sex wedding isn't rape. If you want to use rape, the Christians forced to participate in a same sex wedding against their will were spiritually raped.

What part of the wedding were they "forced" to participate? We're they ring bearers or flower girls? Maid of Honor? Preacher?