For all the Bigoted Bakers, Fanatical Florists and Pharisee Photographers

[ChrisL]

And I called you a twat. and I'll put my IQ up against yours any day of the week.

Look, you are dumb. You don't understand very much about the law. I suggest that you not open a business.

Typical progressive equating disagreement with "dumb".

You can't argue from any strength besides 'the law says so" so you have to resort to calling me stupid.

Sorry, discrimination is not recognized as a "religious right." That's a fact.

So you can force a Catholic priest to marry a gay couple?

No.
Churches are exempt.
Like Chris said, learn the law.

That's because they have nothing, and they know it. This isn't the first time in history the bigots and haters have tried to use their "religious freedom" as an excuse to be hateful human beings. They know it too. They can try to bring a case that it is their religious right to discriminate against others, but it is not when it comes to the business world. Let them suck on that and cry their little hearts out. This is about hatred for a group of people and nothing more. I think that much is obvious to the sane people that post here.

 

[ChrisL]

How would a baker, florist or photographer know if someone was divorced, a virgin, if they lived with someone? Another epic fail because you didn't THINK before you spewed.

How would they know? Well, in order to register, they have to get the address of the people they are working with, and if the bride and groom have the same address, they'd know they lived together, wouldn't they.

I didn't even hit on divorce, mostly because the bible is all over the map on that subject. But if the baker said, "Hey, weren't you in here two years ago with some other dude?" they'd know.

As far as knowing if someone is a virgin, Well, the bible has that totally covered.


22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
22:14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
22:15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
22:16 And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
22:17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity.And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
22:18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;
22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die:because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

Right? I mean, that's totally in the bible, and Jesus didn't change the rules, did he?

Nope. WE changed the rules. Just like we changed the rules on homosexuality.

Your fundamental flaw,yes Jesus most certainly changed the rules.that being the very heart of his ministry
Not understanding that is why you are so confused in your posting content.

No sorry, you cannot use the excuse of "religious freedom" to discriminate against other American citizens. It's not going to fly.

 

[Silhouette]

No sorry, you cannot use the excuse of "religious freedom" to discriminate against other American citizens. It's not going to fly.

Religious freedom isn't an "excuse", it's a 1st Amendment civil right.

Moreover, you cannot use the PA excuse to expunge or mute the 1st Amendment civil right. Read the 9th Amendment and weep dearie..

 

[ChrisL]

No sorry, you cannot use the excuse of "religious freedom" to discriminate against other American citizens. It's not going to fly.

Religious freedom isn't an "excuse", it's a 1st Amendment civil right.

Moreover, you cannot use the PA excuse to expunge or mute the 1st Amendment civil right. Read the 9th Amendment and weep dearie..

Nope, case law has already established that the government doesn't recognize discrimination as a religious practice or custom. You lose.

 

[ChrisL]

No sorry, you cannot use the excuse of "religious freedom" to discriminate against other American citizens. It's not going to fly.

Religious freedom isn't an "excuse", it's a 1st Amendment civil right.

Moreover, you cannot use the PA excuse to expunge or mute the 1st Amendment civil right. Read the 9th Amendment and weep dearie..

This was already established in the 1960s when people like you used these exact same excuses to continue discriminating against blacks and women. Lol! The government doesn't recognize it as a "religious right" to deny other Americans services. That's the way it is here in our great country. One of the things that makes it so great.

 

[Silhouette]

No sorry, you cannot use the excuse of "religious freedom" to discriminate against other American citizens. It's not going to fly.

Religious freedom isn't an "excuse", it's a 1st Amendment civil right.

Moreover, you cannot use the PA excuse to expunge or mute the 1st Amendment civil right. Read the 9th Amendment and weep dearie..

Nope, case law has already established that the government doesn't recognize discrimination as a religious practice or custom. You lose.

Please direct me to information that says state-level case law dominates the 1st & 9th Amendments to the US Constitution (The Supreme Law of the Land)? This oughta be good.. The only ones with authority to define a religious practice belief or edict are those fathers of the religion itself, not the state. Might want to read up on and comprehend the 1st Amendment. The state doesn't tell citizens what their religion is or isn't composed of.

 

[PratchettFan]

Civil Rights Division ENFORCING CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS

The Civil Rights Division of the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) enforces Oregon´s civil rights laws. These laws ban discrimination against individuals because of characteristics that make them part of a protected class. Anyone claiming to have been discriminated against at work, in a place where the public is served such as a restaurant or a hotel, when buying or renting housing or when applying for or attending a career school can file a complaint with the BOLI´s Civil Rights Division.

Ways of Filing a Discrimination Complaint
BOLI´s Civil Rights Complaint Process
Discrimination
Protected Classes
Federal Discrimination Laws
State Discrimination Laws
City Ordinances Against Discrimination
File a complaint with BOLI´s Civil Rights Division

• File a complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

• File a civil suit in State Circuit Court

• File a civil suit in Federal District Court

Protected Classes
Discrimination is unlawful when carried out because of an individual´s race, color, gender or other characteristic protected by law. Such characteristics place people into "protected classes." Everyone belongs to a number of protected classes. For example, we all have a race, a color and a gender.

There are federal, state, county, and city discrimination laws banning discrimination because of an individual´s protected classes.

Sigh...... just so everyone is aware. Chris has, once again, posted the employment discrimination section of Oregon - which has zero to do with this subject.

You may want to read the first paragraph a little closer. Its not limited to employment.

Actually, you're right. It looked like the web site from the Oregon EEOC and I should have looked closer.

Chris - I apologize.

 

[PratchettFan]

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2013 Oregon Revised Statutes

If you only serve Christian weddings then you are denying service to non-Christians.

I think one could still get around it by only offering cakes decorated specifically for Christian ceremonies. Crosses, bible verses, etc.

So, you are suggesting a bakery only sell cakes with crosses on it? If we ignore the business reality that this would probably bankrupt them, how does that stop having to provide that cake to a same sex wedding? There are a lot of gay Christians.

Not a perfect solution but I don't shop in Christian book stores because they don't offer anything I'd want to read.

And since that is all they sell, they are not discriminating. However, if someone were to come wearing a yamaka, they could not refuse to sell one of their books to the person because they were not a Christian. That would be discrimination. Which brings us back to your suggestion, how does only selling Christian themed wedding cakes allow them to refuse to sell it to two Christian women for their wedding?

The law has nothing to do with the product, idiot. Again, it is ACCESS to the product that the state is concerned with. If you open a business that serves the public, then you MUST serve the public. You cannot discriminate and refuse to sell to certain "groups" of people because it is against the law.

Your understanding of the law is, as I said, non-existent.

 

[PratchettFan]

So you couldn't refuse, as a gay printer, printing a billboard that quotes a bible passage condemning homosexuality, as long as you already print billboards with other messages?

It depends on whether or not they offer their signs for that purpose.
I think they have a much better argument in court than the baker does.

Why would purpose come into play? Aren't you the one saying "a cake is a cake is a cake?

The point has been explained multiple times.
A cake is a cake. A cake can't be gay, political or religious. It is a cake.
Advertising is speech. It is a message. As the owner of the billboard, I decide what gets displayed. If I don't offer my billboards for political or religious statements then I don't offer that service. That is not discrimination based on race, gender, religion or sexual preference. If A church wants to advertise their church, fine I offer that. But I will not post religious political statements. Is that hard to understand?

Not hard to understand at all. But that does not change the fact that it would be prohibited discrimination under the Oregon law. Religion is a protected class.

No. As the billboard owner, I'm not discriminating on you because of religion.
I said very clearly that you are free to choose a product I offer such as advertising your church. Being denied service for a product I don't offer is not discrimination.

You are in the business of selling space. Denying that space to me because it is religious is discrimination on the basis of religion. Religion is a protected class. It would have to be tested in court, but I think you would lose.

 

[Desperado]

The Bible also rules out Lobster and Cheeseburgers too. I doubt there are many that follow those rules too.

 

[PratchettFan]

The Bible also rules out Lobster and Cheeseburgers too. I doubt there are many that follow those rules too.

I do and I'm not even a Christian.

 

[JoeB131]

They have nothing to apologize for. They did not try to make said couple's lives miserable. You have to demonize anyone that disagrees with you, and that's sad.

so publishing their names and addresses across their social network of Christian Haters was benign? How about the death threats they Cryer-Bowman family got against their children?

 

[JoeB131]

Neither did MLK when he broke all those segregation laws.

Appeal to authority when the authority is wrong is a weak debating tactic.

Except you haven't demonstrated that authority was wrong here.

They knew what the laws were when they set up their business.

 

[JoeB131]

Soooo, Jo(ke)Butt created a thread that has this many responses.......? You're kidding me, right? What a bunch of dupes!!!

Yes, we know you're shallow.

 

[JoeB131]

Only if there is actual harm, and it has to take into account the rights of the people running the business.

And you are not going anywhere near live and let live. You are telling people to either submit to your moral code, or have government ruin them. You are not asking, or debating, or trying to convince, you cheer on as the government uses its power like a gun down their throat, and a finger on the trigger.

There was actual harm. The gay couple received death threats. That's why the fine was so heavy.

The Kleins were given oppurtunities for reconciliation. They didnt' take them. They doubled down on the bigotry.

 

[JoeB131]

LOL... you're a lying sac of shit...why are "Jews hated wherever they go"

Are you arguing they aren't? Isn't that the whole rational behind Zionism?

Russia won WWII not the U.S."

Russia took 20 million casualties defeating Nazi Germany. We took 400,000 for the whole war. Yeah, they did most of the heavy lifting. Sorry.

What's "there far share"? we should leave it up to people like you to decide? how much a person a allowed to make?

How about going back to the Pre-Reagan tax codes, that brought us the greatest prosperity in history.

Or we can go back to the Eisenhower days where the rich paid 93% top marginal rates.

"The U.S. would be better off as part of Canada" Just some things off the top of my head that your America hating, Jew hating, dumb ass has said.

Now, if you can actually quote what I said, in context AND understand the context through your Roid Rage, you'd be accomplishing something.

So the fact that your dumb ass, went into the army for a couple of years to get money for collage doesn't mean shit to me

But it's more than you ever did.

And "collage"? Really? Lay off the roids, buddy.

 

[JoeB131]

there is no "civil right" that compels those people to perform any service for anyone, Which is why the case was thrown out of court.. Again try keep you emotional rambling out of it

Uh, guy, are you not paying attention?

The case wasn't "thrown out of court". First, the Kleins were never sued by the Bowman-Cryer family. They filed a formal complaint with the BOLI (Bureau of Labor and Industry) that investigates consumer and employee complaints. BOLI attempted to reconcile the issue by letting the Kleins know what the complaint was and that they were in violation of Oregon's Public Accommodation laws.

The Kleins instead responded by making the names of the complaining customers public on Social Media, after which the Bowman-Cryers received numerous death threats because Jesus Loves You. They refused to make compensation,a nd they refused to desist in the practice.

Then and ONLY then were the Kleins fined under the rules.

 

[JoeB131]

And yet Creationism and those who would present it are excluded from Public education. While presenting that homosexuality as an alternative cannot be. I dare say that there are whites, blacks, brown, yellow and red people who can and do believe there are very ethical, logical, and rational reasons that Creationism is a viable alternative to evolution and uniformitarianism.

Okay, but there's no scientific evidence for creationism.

Also, whose creationism do you teach? I now you want the Christian fairy Tale, but why shouldn't the Hindu or Bhuddist Fairy Tale get equal time and treatment?

 

[JoeB131]

The laws of commerce still must accede to the bill of rights, and a compelling government interest must be shown if they are to be restricted.

I think ending discrimination against gays is a compelling interest, just like ending discrimination against blacks was a compelling interest.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, but a bakery didn't turn down participation/promotion of a gay wedding; two living breathing people did. It's their business comrad Chris. And their 1st Amendment civil right to do so. So says the 9th Amendment.

The 1st Amendment applies to them, not their business. If they had a problem attending personally, then they should have hired someone who had no such qualms.