Oregon imposes gag order on Christian bakers in gay wedding case

[Silhouette]

BOLI’s Administrative Prosecution Unit is responsible for processing contested civil rights division cases pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and BOLI contested case hearing rules. ..BOLI protects all Oregonians from unlawful discrimination, investigating allegations of civil rights violations in workplaces, career schools, housing and public accommodations.


http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-...e_gresham_bakers_discriminated_illegally.html

All Oregonians except Christians practicing their 1st Amendment civil rights to exercise their religion. Jude 1 of the New Testament prohibits them from enabling the spread of a homosexual culture. Marriage is the hub of any culture. If they fail this mandate, this mortal sin, it is under pain of eternal soul death. The language of Jude 1 is not vague in this regard.

The equivalent would be to require that gay bakers not be allowed to buy didos or participate in Pride parades because doing so is a form of oppression against Christian beliefs. For that matter, how long will it be before Christians force gay graphic artists or cake designers to write the passage of Jude 1 on a billboard, monument or child's confirmation cake?

The 9th Amendment to the Constitution says that no new law may come along and modify or impinge upon any other rights granted in the Constitution. That includes the 1st Amendment..." judge soon-to-be-unemployed" of Oregon.. I'd cite that ordinace right on the application for investigating the judge. Civil rights violations are civil rights violations. Plain and simple. There are no favorites, even in Oregon..

Like I said before about this asshole backwater judge in Oregon, the "silencing" mechanism is a double-edged sword:

The defendants/Christians must simply turn the judge in for judicial misconduct. No sitting judge may order the silencing of anyone if that silencing 1. Has nothing to do with the case and 2. Seeks merely to cover the judge's ass for a shitty ruling. and 3. Suppresses someone's 1st Amendment civil rights without just cause. (other laws allegedly dominating the 1st Amendment are not allowed to do so. Consult the 9th Amendment for details)

Here are the links that these people (or anyone else in Oregon) can utilize to silence the judge instead: Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability : CJFD Home - CJFD Home

Easy to fill out form to launch an investigation into the judicial misconduct in this case: http://courts.oregon.gov/CJFD/docs/040105RevisedComplaintForm.pdf

Applicants should cite the 1st Amendment and the 9th Amendment of the US Constitution, and provide a copy of the Ruling and if possible the transcripts of the hearing and any other documentation of the prosecution. These commissions take their jobs very seriously. They hold a very high standard of judicial conduct in order to preseve the public's faith in a fair and just judicial system. Bad judges make for bad countries.

 

[dblack]

It's good to see more awareness that freedom of speech, in particular freedom of political expression, is what's being sacrificed with these laws.

Welcome to the real world, where your Freedom of Speech can be very expensive.

You mean the new United Socialist States of America. Just picking up where USSR left off...

Nope. These are well-established laws. If you bake cakes, serve one, serve all. It's not complicated, and it's business, not faith.

Curious,
How do you feel about the network pulling the Dukes of Hazzard reruns off the air because of the confederate flag being painted on the car.

A business decision that conservatives should praise as an example of how markets fix everything.

lol

And that's exactly how things like this should handled. Not with laws coercing acceptance.

 

[BluesLegend]

A law was broken:

659A.409

Notice that discrimination will be made in place of public accommodation prohibited

• 
  
  
  • • age exceptions

"Except as provided by laws governing the consumption of alcoholic beverages by minors and the frequenting by minors of places of public accommodation where alcoholic beverages are served, and except for special rates or services offered to persons 50 years of age or older, it is an unlawful practice for any person acting on behalf of any place of public accommodation as defined in ORS 659A.400 (Place of public accommodation defined) to publish, circulate, issue or display, or cause to be published, circulated, issued or displayed, any communication, notice, advertisement or sign of any kind to the effect that any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services or privileges of the place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination will be made against, any person on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is 18 years of age or older. [Formerly 659.037; 2003 c.521 §3; 2005 c.131 §2; 2007 c.100 §7]"

Where does it authorize government to fine anyone for $135,000?

$135k for hurt feelings? The intent of this so called damage award is to silence free speech and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

 

[BluesLegend]

Press release from the OR Bureau of Labor: http://www.oregon.gov/boli/SiteAssets/pages/press/7_2_15 BOLI rules on Sweet Cakes discrimination case.pdf It notes in there what the judgment was based on and cites two prior cases where a Christian was discriminated against and awarded 325,000. Also a BK shop that discriminated based on race.

Press release, two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[paperview]

Where does it authorize government to fine anyone for $135,000?

$135k for hurt feelings? The intent of this so called damage award is to silence free speech and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

Didn't work out too well for Piggie Park.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Where does it authorize government to fine anyone for $135,000?

$135k for hurt feelings? The intent of this so called damage award is to silence free speech and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

 

[bripat9643]

$135k for hurt feelings? The intent of this so called damage award is to silence free speech and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Heil Hitler, you fucking Nazi.

 

[paperview]

Press release from the OR Bureau of Labor: http://www.oregon.gov/boli/SiteAssets/pages/press/7_2_15 BOLI rules on Sweet Cakes discrimination case.pdf It notes in there what the judgment was based on and cites two prior cases where a Christian was discriminated against and awarded 325,000. Also a BK shop that discriminated based on race.

Press release, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yabbut, two righties usually make a wrong.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

A little of topic but my mom knows a lady who owns a shop in Indianapolis, she sells jewelry and collectibles and does a really good business in the downtown area. A couple of weeks ago Indy had it's Pride festival and many of the shops put up rainbow flags and they left them up due to the SCOTUS ruling. This woman told my mom she finally took the flags and pennants down because of her business dropping off. She also told my mom a lot of other shops took them down also. Sometimes things backfire.

 

[BluesLegend]

$135k for hurt feelings? The intent of this so called damage award is to silence free speech and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

 

[BluesLegend]

Press release from the OR Bureau of Labor: http://www.oregon.gov/boli/SiteAssets/pages/press/7_2_15 BOLI rules on Sweet Cakes discrimination case.pdf It notes in there what the judgment was based on and cites two prior cases where a Christian was discriminated against and awarded 325,000. Also a BK shop that discriminated based on race.

Press release, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yabbut, two righties usually make a wrong.

Don't quit your day job...oh wait that one doesn't work on you libs.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A little of topic but my mom knows a lady who owns a shop in Indianapolis, she sells jewelry and collectibles and does a really good business in the downtown area. A couple of weeks ago Indy had it's Pride festival and many of the shops put up rainbow flags and they left them up due to the SCOTUS ruling. This woman told my mom she finally took the flags and pennants down because of her business dropping off. She also told my mom a lot of other shops took them down also. Sometimes things backfire.

Capitalism. They took from the 2% all that they could...

 

[HenryBHough]

Liberals OWN a business?

How is that possible? Liberals all know (or at least have to say they do if they want to stay in The Democrat Party) that nobody OWNS anything - it all belongs to the state and they only get to rent it.

 

[bripat9643]

Press release from the OR Bureau of Labor: http://www.oregon.gov/boli/SiteAssets/pages/press/7_2_15 BOLI rules on Sweet Cakes discrimination case.pdf It notes in there what the judgment was based on and cites two prior cases where a Christian was discriminated against and awarded 325,000. Also a BK shop that discriminated based on race.

Press release, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yabbut, two righties usually make a wrong.

Two lefties make a critical mass of stupidity.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm really curious to know how the judge arrived at a fine of $135,000 as the penalty. The law doesn't mention any penalties.

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

If your ex-wife is even close to how smart I am it explains why you are divorced...

 

[BluesLegend]

It would be easier to challenge a fine or civil penalty, damages on the other hand are more arbitrary which is why the judge went to some lengths to point out the award was not a fine or civil penalty.

I mean come on, $135k in damage over a freaking cake is utterly ridiculous UNLESS your real goal was to intimidate, silence, and bully people into giving up their Constitutional rights.

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

If your ex-wife is even close to how smart I am it explains why you are divorced...

Frankly I'm surprised you can operate a computer or tie your shoe laces.

 

[paperview]

Press release from the OR Bureau of Labor: http://www.oregon.gov/boli/SiteAssets/pages/press/7_2_15 BOLI rules on Sweet Cakes discrimination case.pdf It notes in there what the judgment was based on and cites two prior cases where a Christian was discriminated against and awarded 325,000. Also a BK shop that discriminated based on race.

Press release, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yabbut, two righties usually make a wrong.

Don't quit your day job...oh wait that one doesn't work on you libs.

I've owned my own business for nearly 30 years, chum.

I'll tell you this too --> I'd never hire your BK ass.

You keep on workin' that fryolator, boy. Someday you even might make it cashier!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If it was a lawsuit, then the defendants are entitled to a jury trial.

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

If your ex-wife is even close to how smart I am it explains why you are divorced...

Frankly I'm surprised you can operate a computer or tie your shoe laces.

Calling bullshit on your politics and opinions takes very little effort. You think like a moron.

 

[paperview]

I know, this one is destined for the SCOTUS.

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

If your ex-wife is even close to how smart I am it explains why you are divorced...

Frankly I'm surprised you can operate a computer or tie your shoe laces.

Calling bullshit on your politics and opinions takes very little effort. You think like a moron.

Poor Blues had to wear a rainbow flag I assigned him as his avatar for a month because of his idiocy.

That was fun.

It happened not once, but twice. lol

 

[Maryland Patriot]

The SC has already rejected such things. Obey the law, shut up and bake the cake.

Are you my EX wife? I ask because you sound like a real harpy.

If your ex-wife is even close to how smart I am it explains why you are divorced...

Frankly I'm surprised you can operate a computer or tie your shoe laces.

Calling bullshit on your politics and opinions takes very little effort. You think like a moron.

Poor Blues had to wear a rainbow flag I assigned him as his avatar for a month because of his idiocy.

That was fun.

It happened not once, but twice. lol

whats wrong with wearing a rainbow flag?