Oregon Bakers: You get to pay 135,000 for being radical religious morons, Judge so orders!

[WorldWatcher]

The bakery did not offer gay-themed cakes to anyone. There was no public accomodation for gay-themed cakes, no matter who wanted one.

Another failed attempt by the constantly overturned left coast judges to set arbitrary law.

The bakery offered Wedding Cakes which is what was requested. The customers were turned away after requesting a product that the bakery offered.

No "gay themed cake" was requested because the customers were refused service before any discussion of design.

This is included in the Statement of Facts that the bakers agreed to as part of the legal proceedings. It helps the discussion to discuss the actual facts of a cake instead of making up strawman arguments and then arguing against them.


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

The bakery did not offer gay-themed cakes to anyone. There was no public accomodation for gay-themed cakes, no matter who wanted one.

Another failed attempt by the constantly overturned left coast judges to set arbitrary law.

The bakery offered Wedding Cakes which is what was requested. The customers were turned away after requesting a product that the bakery offered.

No "gay themed cake" was requested because the customers were refused service before any discussion of design.

This is included in the Statement of Facts that the bakers agreed to as part of the legal proceedings. It helps the discussion to discuss the actual facts of a cake instead of making up strawman arguments and then arguing against them.


>>>>

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

 

[Lysistrata]

The U.S. Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith is instructional:

{{meta.pageTitle}}

which was brought on First Amendment grounds:

Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia said that allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Scalia cited as examples compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccination requirements, and child-neglect laws.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

They never got to design discussion, this is agreed to by the bakers in the Statement of Facts that they agreed to as part of the court proceedings.

You statement that they requested a "gay themed cake" is not born out by the facts.

I presented a sample cake from one of the bakers catalog in a previous post. The bakers would have made it and sold it to a different-sex couple but refused it for a same-sex couple. Since it's the exact same cake, what specifically in it's manufacture or design suddenly makes it "gay themed" when it's the same cake?

(The answer of course is that there is no difference in the Wedding Cake, the difference is who is ordering it.)

>>>>>

 

[bodecea]

The bakery did not offer gay-themed cakes to anyone. There was no public accomodation for gay-themed cakes, no matter who wanted one.

Another failed attempt by the constantly overturned left coast judges to set arbitrary law.

The bakery offered Wedding Cakes which is what was requested. The customers were turned away after requesting a product that the bakery offered.

No "gay themed cake" was requested because the customers were refused service before any discussion of design.

This is included in the Statement of Facts that the bakers agreed to as part of the legal proceedings. It helps the discussion to discuss the actual facts of a cake instead of making up strawman arguments and then arguing against them.


>>>>

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

They did not even get to that point.....but it is fun watching you argue from a position of total ignorance of the facts.

 

[bodecea]

The U.S. Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith is instructional:

{{meta.pageTitle}}

which was brought on First Amendment grounds:

Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia said that allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Scalia cited as examples compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccination requirements, and child-neglect laws.

Scalia......that's priceless!

 

[Aba Incieni]

The bakery did not offer gay-themed cakes to anyone. There was no public accomodation for gay-themed cakes, no matter who wanted one.

Another failed attempt by the constantly overturned left coast judges to set arbitrary law.

The bakery offered Wedding Cakes which is what was requested. The customers were turned away after requesting a product that the bakery offered.

No "gay themed cake" was requested because the customers were refused service before any discussion of design.

This is included in the Statement of Facts that the bakers agreed to as part of the legal proceedings. It helps the discussion to discuss the actual facts of a cake instead of making up strawman arguments and then arguing against them.


>>>>

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

They did not even get to that point.....but it is fun watching you argue from a position of total ignorance of the facts.

So you say. They still haven't made a gay-themed cake. They never did. Because of their religious beliefs.

Some think they should be forced to. You?

 

[paperview]

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

They never got to design discussion, this is agreed to by the bakers in the Statement of Facts that they agreed to as part of the court proceedings.

You statement that they requested a "gay themed cake" is not born out by the facts.

I presented a sample cake from one of the bakers catalog in a previous post. The bakers would have made it and sold it to a different-sex couple but refused it for a same-sex couple. Since it's the exact same cake, what specifically in it's manufacture or design suddenly makes it "gay themed" when it's the same cake?

(The answer of course is that there is no difference in the Wedding Cake, the difference is who is ordering it.)

>>>>>

BuT iT's a GaY CayyyyKKe!!



Happy New Years, WW!

 

[Aba Incieni]

They wanted a custom made gay-themed cake. The bakery did not offer them. I have posted in this thread that the baker himself said they serve gay people.

They never got to design discussion, this is agreed to by the bakers in the Statement of Facts that they agreed to as part of the court proceedings.

You statement that they requested a "gay themed cake" is not born out by the facts.

I presented a sample cake from one of the bakers catalog in a previous post. The bakers would have made it and sold it to a different-sex couple but refused it for a same-sex couple. Since it's the exact same cake, what specifically in it's manufacture or design suddenly makes it "gay themed" when it's the same cake?

(The answer of course is that there is no difference in the Wedding Cake, the difference is who is ordering it.)

>>>>>

All of their wedding cakes were custom made. The baker wouldn't make a gay-themed cake for anyone, although they served gays equally as their hetero counterparts.

 

[WorldWatcher]

So you say. They still haven't made a gay-themed cake. They never did. Because of their religious beliefs.

Some think they should be forced to. You?

They were never asked to make a "gay themed cake".



>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

So you say. They still haven't made a gay-themed cake. They never did. Because of their religious beliefs.

Some think they should be forced to. You?

They were never asked to make a "gay themed cake".



>>>>

They serve gay customers. Must be some mistake.

 

[WorldWatcher]

All of their wedding cakes were custom made. The baker wouldn't make a gay-themed cake for anyone,...

Of course Wedding Cakes are custom make. They are not made and put on a shelf. Bakers have catalogs of prior works that can be reproduced or they can work with you to design a one-off.

However there was never any design discussion. Please familiarize yourself with the cake, the legal documents are out there on the internet, you can read them yourself.

Just because a cake is custome designed (or ordered from a catalog) doesn't make it "gay themed".

...although they served gays equally as their hetero counterparts.

They didn't serve the same-sex couple equally, they refused them the same services they offered to a different-sex couple.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

They serve gay customers. Must be some mistake.

The fact that they may have sold them other products is irrelevant.

Providing all products and services to one group while limiting the same products and services to another another group is a clear violation of the law. I've posted the Oregon statutes for you, the law requires full and equal access to goods and services, not a subset of goods and services.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

BuT iT's a GaY CayyyyKKe!!



Happy New Years, WW!

Happy to year PV. :mrgreen:


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

All of their wedding cakes were custom made. The baker wouldn't make a gay-themed cake for anyone,...

THere was never any design discussion. Please familiarize yourself with the cake, the legal documents are out there on the internet, you can read them yourself.

Just because a cake is custome designed (or ordered from a catalog) doesn't make it "gay themed".

...although they served gays equally as their hetero counterparts.

They didn't serve the same-sex couple equally, they refused them the same services they offered to a different-sex couple.


>>>>

The bakery did not offer what they were looking for. Not because the clients were dykes.

 

[Aba Incieni]

They serve gay customers. Must be some mistake.

The fact that they may have sold them other products is irrelevant.

Providing all products and services to one group while limiting the same products and services to another another group is a clear violation of the law. I've posted the Oregon statutes for you, the law requires full and equal access to goods and services, not a subset of goods and services.


>>>>

Straight couples were not sold gay-themed cakes, either.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The bakery did not offer what they were looking for. Not because the clients were dykes.

The couple was looking for a wedding cake, Sweetcakes supplied wedding cakes.

They supplied a wedding cake to the mothers wedding two yeas before.

The had a booth at a bridal convention to sell wedding cakes and Ms. Klein invited them to the shop.


>>>>

 

[paperview]

They serve gay customers. Must be some mistake.

The fact that they may have sold them other products is irrelevant.

Providing all products and services to one group while limiting the same products and services to another another group is a clear violation of the law. I've posted the Oregon statutes for you, the law requires full and equal access to goods and services, not a subset of goods and services.


>>>>

We've been through five freakin years of repeating the same facts about this episode, and now, after all the court cases -- still, it's like it happened yesterday to some of these people. Over and over and over.

I've given up a while ago. They don't care about the facts.

Still, bless you. You have the patience of a saint.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Straight couples were not sold gay-themed cakes, either.

They never got to design discussion, this is agreed to by the bakers in the Statement of Facts that they agreed to as part of the court proceedings.

You statement that they requested a "gay themed cake" is not born out by the facts.

I presented a sample cake from one of the bakers catalog in a previous post. The bakers would have made it and sold it to a different-sex couple but refused it for a same-sex couple. Since it's the exact same cake, what specifically in it's manufacture or design suddenly makes it "gay themed" when it's the same cake?

(The answer of course is that there is no difference in the Wedding Cake, the difference is who is ordering it.)


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

The bakery did not offer what they were looking for. Not because the clients were dykes.

The couple was looking for a wedding cake, Sweetcakes supplied wedding cakes.

They supplied a wedding cake to the mothers wedding two yeas before.

The had a booth at a bridal convention to sell wedding cakes and Ms. Klein invited them to the shop.


>>>>

They were looking for a specially made, custom baked cake. The bakery did not offer what they were looking for. To anyone.