The dreaded gay-wedding-cake saga ends: bakers must pay 135 K

[Pop23]

Sanctuary cities: No big deal, that's fine, these are good people

Businesses not allowing legal guns: Hey, that's up to the business, who can blame them

Illegal pot smoking: Big deal, leave 'em alone, they're not hurting anyone

Won't bake a cake: HOLY CRAP, THROW THE BOOK AT 'EM, DESTROY THEM, MAKE THEM PAY A $135,000 FINE!!!



.

Hey, if you feel that your civil rights have been violated, then you are also entitled to file a suit.

You don't understand the law much do you? It's not simply about filing suit, the government has a duty to protect your rights.

Another red herring fail.

Look fool. You are the same as the tools who tried to use "religious rights" to deny black people the same rights. Now suck it up. The fact of the matter is, the government isn't going to recognize your stupidity and allow you to discriminate against other groups of American citizens.

You look dumber and dumber with each and every post. You say the government isn't going to recognize........?

Prove it by stating the compelling state interest in denying these individuals RIGHT that are guaranteed them under the constitution now that the USSC deamed them so.

Go ahead dimwit, I'm sure your eighth grade education will allow you the ability to come up with a more stimulating argument then..........

Cuz I say so!

This has already been proven in the 1950s and 60s when people like you tried it back then to deny rights to women and black people! Lol! The courts do not recognize discrimination as a religious right. You cannot violate another person's civil rights and claim it is your religious right! You just cannot.

And then you argue Separate but Equal is good public policy in another post.

Seriously, you can't make this shit up!!!!!

 

[ChrisL]

Hey, if you feel that your civil rights have been violated, then you are also entitled to file a suit.

You don't understand the law much do you? It's not simply about filing suit, the government has a duty to protect your rights.

Another red herring fail.

Look fool. You are the same as the tools who tried to use "religious rights" to deny black people the same rights. Now suck it up. The fact of the matter is, the government isn't going to recognize your stupidity and allow you to discriminate against other groups of American citizens.

You look dumber and dumber with each and every post. You say the government isn't going to recognize........?

Prove it by stating the compelling state interest in denying these individuals RIGHT that are guaranteed them under the constitution now that the USSC deamed them so.

Go ahead dimwit, I'm sure your eighth grade education will allow you the ability to come up with a more stimulating argument then..........

Cuz I say so!

This has already been proven in the 1950s and 60s when people like you tried it back then to deny rights to women and black people! Lol! The courts do not recognize discrimination as a religious right. You cannot violate another person's civil rights and claim it is your religious right! You just cannot.

And then you argue Separate but Equal is good public policy in another post.

Seriously, you can't make this shit up!!!!!

No, you are just stupid. That's the problem here. Lol.

 

[Pop23]

I'm most offended that these Homophobes are still calling themselves Christian.

Homophobia has no place in Christ's world.

I know a few non christian gym owners that refuse access to men in women's locker / shower rooms even though they allow lesbians. They base that on moral judgements I guess because it appears that public accomodations laws would prohibit this b

Again, this has already been explained to you. Do they have accommodations at the club? Do they have a shower room there for men and women? Yes? Then you are wrong.

Good god, you are so yesterday. Did blacks have separate but equal restrooms? How'd that work out dummy?

You can separate restrooms by gender. You cannot separate by race. Good Lord! These laws are WELL ESTABLISHED.

I'll try one last time then

What is the compelling state reason that this denial of the males right exist when a lesbian (who by the way like women in the same way as men do - TRUE STORY) is allowed in the shower room.

Here's a clue, when you attempt to make an argument based on morality or tradition you then argue for traditional marriage and the right for the baker not to bake the cake.

Would you prefer I argue for you?

 

[Seawytch]

Christian bakers, including the Oregon bakers, gladly sold many baked goods to homos that they knew were homos.

They just refused to participate in sacrilege.

Really? Which ones refused to sell to the interfaith or divorced and remarrying couple? None?

That's because they aren't being good Christians, they're being transparent bigots.

Can you show they prepared wedding cakes for such weddings?

Bakery Will Do Pagan Cloning and Divorce Cakes But Not Gay Weddings Advocate.com

However, two undercover reporters from Portland alternative weekly paper Willamette Week discovered the bakery operators were happy to bake goods for celebrations of other things conservatives traditionally scorn, including parties for divorce, a pagan solstice, and stem cell research.
When one of the reporters called and asked if the business could make two identical cakes to help a friend celebrate the grant she received for cloning human stem cells, a Sweet Cakes employee simply laughed and said, “It’ll be $25.99 each, so about $50 to start.”
A request for a cake to congratulate a friend on her divorce was also happily accepted, with a Sweet Cakes worker saying, “We can definitely do something like that.”
Sweet Cakes was even happy to take orders for cakes for a pagan summer solstice fete — complete with a green pentagram decoration — and celebrating babies born out of wedlock.

Fake Christians, transparent bigots.

 

[bendog]

I'm most offended that these Homophobes are still calling themselves Christian.

Homophobia has no place in Christ's world.

I know a few non christian gym owners that refuse access to men in women's locker / shower rooms even though they allow lesbians. They base that on moral judgements I guess because it appears that public accomodations laws would prohibit this b

Again, this has already been explained to you. Do they have accommodations at the club? Do they have a shower room there for men and women? Yes? Then you are wrong.

Good god, you are so yesterday. Did blacks have separate but equal restrooms? How'd that work out dummy?

You can separate restrooms by gender. You cannot separate by race. Good Lord! These laws are WELL ESTABLISHED.

I'll try one last time then

What is the compelling state reason that this denial of the males right exist when a lesbian (who by the way like women in the same way as men do - TRUE STORY) is allowed in the shower room.

Here's a clue, when you attempt to make an argument based on morality or tradition you then argue for traditional marriage and the right for the baker not to bake the cake.

Would you prefer I argue for you?

You get to shower with women you're not married to. I hate you. (-:

 

[ChrisL]

I'm most offended that these Homophobes are still calling themselves Christian.

Homophobia has no place in Christ's world.

I know a few non christian gym owners that refuse access to men in women's locker / shower rooms even though they allow lesbians. They base that on moral judgements I guess because it appears that public accomodations laws would prohibit this b

Again, this has already been explained to you. Do they have accommodations at the club? Do they have a shower room there for men and women? Yes? Then you are wrong.

Good god, you are so yesterday. Did blacks have separate but equal restrooms? How'd that work out dummy?

You can separate restrooms by gender. You cannot separate by race. Good Lord! These laws are WELL ESTABLISHED.

I'll try one last time then

What is the compelling state reason that this denial of the males right exist when a lesbian (who by the way like women in the same way as men do - TRUE STORY) is allowed in the shower room.

Here's a clue, when you attempt to make an argument based on morality or tradition you then argue for traditional marriage and the right for the baker not to bake the cake.

Would you prefer I argue for you?

No, as long as both men and women have accommodations that is not illegal. Your arguments are stupid and easy to pick apart because you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[The Rabbi]

Christian bakers, including the Oregon bakers, gladly sold many baked goods to homos that they knew were homos.

They just refused to participate in sacrilege.

Really? Which ones refused to sell to the interfaith or divorced and remarrying couple? None?

That's because they aren't being good Christians, they're being transparent bigots.

Can you show they prepared wedding cakes for such weddings?

Bakery Will Do Pagan Cloning and Divorce Cakes But Not Gay Weddings Advocate.com

However, two undercover reporters from Portland alternative weekly paper Willamette Week discovered the bakery operators were happy to bake goods for celebrations of other things conservatives traditionally scorn, including parties for divorce, a pagan solstice, and stem cell research.
When one of the reporters called and asked if the business could make two identical cakes to help a friend celebrate the grant she received for cloning human stem cells, a Sweet Cakes employee simply laughed and said, “It’ll be $25.99 each, so about $50 to start.”
A request for a cake to congratulate a friend on her divorce was also happily accepted, with a Sweet Cakes worker saying, “We can definitely do something like that.”
Sweet Cakes was even happy to take orders for cakes for a pagan summer solstice fete — complete with a green pentagram decoration — and celebrating babies born out of wedlock.

Fake Christians, transparent bigots.

Somehow I just dont think you are in any position to pass judgement on who is a "real Christian" or not. And you calling others bigots is just too precious for words.

 

[Faun]

Flaming imbecile, straight people had the right to marry the person they love. How do you still not get this?

Yes, "who they love." Laws are always based on what you want. That's the way our legal system works. And you call me the "flaming imbecile?"

I am a vegetarian except I eat fish. So can I fish during hunting season? I don't want to eat game, just fish. They have to accommodate me, don't they?

It really is no one's fault but your own that you don't know the primary reason for getting married is to make a life long commitment to the person you love. That's why it's a fundamental right towards the inalienable right to pursue happiness.

That has nothing to do with what I said

Of course it does. The main purpose of marriage is to make a life long commitment to the purpose you love. That's why it's a fundamental right. You're trying desperately to make about something other than that. Apparently, you think marriage isn't about love.

Name another law that changes based on what you want.

You like ignoring it, but I keep pointing out you have a Constitutional option. The legislature. It is your circumventing the Constitution that is the big issue

No need to look at other laws, they're irrelevant. Marriage is about making a life long commitment to the person you love. Everyone has that right to marry, including homosexuals. And the legislature was not necessary in securing gays' rights to marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court was within their jurisdiction to decide that deny gays that right violated the U.S. Constitution.

 

[koshergrl]

No, they weren't. And 4 of the sitting justices say the 5 politically motivated justices are full of shit.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No, they weren't. And 4 of the sitting justices say the 5 politically motivated justices are full of shit.

Their reasoning is perfectly sound, the same as other marriage cases. It just goes to human decency, so you hate it...

 

[Andylusion]

I am sure that "Christian" bakers have sold cakes to lots of gay people, but didn't know.
And I am QUITE sure that they have sold sweet goods to masturbators out there as well.
Masturbation is classified as a deadly sin in the Bible. The Book of Genesis (Beresheet), chapter 38, is dedicated to this:

Onan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

Early Rabbis argued that this was about masturbation. Catholics argue that this story is about contracepted sex.

Either way, if your seed lands on the earth, you die, according to the Bible...


So, why are those bakers selling sweet stuff to all those masturbators out there?

eeek!!!

I agree. If I do not know what the cake is for, then I am not held accountable for it. But if they tell me "This is for an SSM", then I would have to say 'no'.

Because that would violate my religious views.

No, Masturbation is not 'classified' as a sin. Moron lol. This is what happens when pagans read the Bible, and think they understand what they are reading. The sin that Onan committed is that he did not want to raise up a child in his brothers name, which is required in the law of Moses. He spilled his seed on the ground to avoid doing his duty to his brothers wife. Why, we don't know. But nevertheless, he sinned in refusing to do his duty, and G-d struck him down for it.

Now I would agree that a Christian male should not masturbate. He should use his energy to please his wife, and his wife him. The Bible says that a man should not think of a women he is not married to. Unless you are thinking of your wife, while doing it.... which most men are not.... then they are sinning.

Equally, some men would rather please themselves, than please their wives. And that is also a sin. But next time, do real Christians a favor, if you don't understand the Bible, stop pretending you do.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am sure that "Christian" bakers have sold cakes to lots of gay people, but didn't know.
And I am QUITE sure that they have sold sweet goods to masturbators out there as well.
Masturbation is classified as a deadly sin in the Bible. The Book of Genesis (Beresheet), chapter 38, is dedicated to this:

Onan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

Early Rabbis argued that this was about masturbation. Catholics argue that this story is about contracepted sex.

Either way, if your seed lands on the earth, you die, according to the Bible...


So, why are those bakers selling sweet stuff to all those masturbators out there?

eeek!!!

I agree. If I do not know what the cake is for, then I am not held accountable for it. But if they tell me "This is for an SSM", then I would have to say 'no'.

Because that would violate my religious views.

No, Masturbation is not 'classified' as a sin. Moron lol. This is what happens when pagans read the Bible, and think they understand what they are reading. The sin that Onan committed is that he did not want to raise up a child in his brothers name, which is required in the law of Moses. He spilled his seed on the ground to avoid doing his duty to his brothers wife. Why, we don't know. But nevertheless, he sinned in refusing to do his duty, and G-d struck him down for it.

Now I would agree that a Christian male should not masturbate. He should use his energy to please his wife, and his wife him. The Bible says that a man should not think of a women he is not married to. Unless you are thinking of your wife, while doing it.... which most men are not.... then they are sinning.

Equally, some men would rather please themselves, than please their wives. And that is also a sin. But next time, do real Christians a favor, if you don't understand the Bible, stop pretending you do.

Yes, according to the bible it is. Get over yourself.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[Jackson]

SCOTUS has already thrown out similiar lawsuits, and that was BEFORE marriage was declared a right.

The Bigoted Kleins don't have a leg to stand on.

This was not a fine. These were damages. Not only for refusing the service, but also the misery that the Kleins put the Bowman-Crier family through by putting their names and address out on Facebook and the public domain. In turn, they received death threats from "Christians" showing how much of what Jesus had to say really sunk in.

Forgot about Hobby Lobby already, did you? Leftwats sure do have short memories.

Nothing to forget...didn't read the opinions did you?

But on Monday morning, the apocalypse didn’t come. In fact, quite the opposite: In its ruling for Hobby Lobby, the court—in an opinion authored by arch-conservative Justice Samuel Alito—explicitly stated that RFRA could not be used as a “shield” to “cloak … discrimination in hiring” as a “religious practice to escape legal sanction.” RFRA doesn’t permit employers to break a law when there is a compelling government interest backing that regulation, and, according to Alito, the government “has a compelling interest in providing an equal opportunity to participate in the workforce.”

Alito cites racial discrimination in his opinion. But Justice Anthony Kennedy, in a concurrence, cabins the court’s ruling even further, making clear that the majority isn’t rewriting RFRA (or the First Amendment) to protect anti-gay discrimination. Kennedy denies that the opinion is a startling “breadth and sweep,” noting that this case could easily be “distinguish[ed] ... from many others in which it is more difficult” to strike a balance between legal regulations and “an alleged statutory right of free exercise.” While religious liberty may permit employers to exercise their own beliefs to a point, “neither may that same exercise unduly restrict … employees in protecting their own interests.” Translation: This case is about birth control and nothing more—and as a general rule, employees still have a compelling interest in most laws that protect their rights.

The Hobby Lobby ruling is good for gays and doesn t allow discrimination.

Oh, good, you're still alive..

The case had to do with a specific law that pointedly forced a company to violate it's religious beliefs and it falls in line with the simple fact that the Constitution protects religious freedom. The courts will likely also distinguish serving gays in general and serving them in a specific fashion that forces company owners to violate their religious sense of right and wrong. The Constitution protects religious belief, it does NOT protect the "right" to be served by any business...

Which is why the unconstitutional public accommodation laws will soon be in our cross hairs too.

Great! Make sure you start with the Federal law that protects Christians.

Not a "states rights" guy?

States don't have rights under the Constitution, they have powers. I wouldn't expect you to know that.

I have to disagree. For years the powers the states have have been coined "states' rights."

states' rights
"noun

1. the rights and powers held by individual US states rather than by the federal government."

I have read books on the topic.

 

[kaz]

I am sure that "Christian" bakers have sold cakes to lots of gay people, but didn't know.
And I am QUITE sure that they have sold sweet goods to masturbators out there as well.
Masturbation is classified as a deadly sin in the Bible. The Book of Genesis (Beresheet), chapter 38, is dedicated to this:

Onan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

Early Rabbis argued that this was about masturbation. Catholics argue that this story is about contracepted sex.

Either way, if your seed lands on the earth, you die, according to the Bible...


So, why are those bakers selling sweet stuff to all those masturbators out there?

eeek!!!

I agree. If I do not know what the cake is for, then I am not held accountable for it. But if they tell me "This is for an SSM", then I would have to say 'no'.

Because that would violate my religious views.

No, Masturbation is not 'classified' as a sin. Moron lol. This is what happens when pagans read the Bible, and think they understand what they are reading. The sin that Onan committed is that he did not want to raise up a child in his brothers name, which is required in the law of Moses. He spilled his seed on the ground to avoid doing his duty to his brothers wife. Why, we don't know. But nevertheless, he sinned in refusing to do his duty, and G-d struck him down for it.

Now I would agree that a Christian male should not masturbate. He should use his energy to please his wife, and his wife him. The Bible says that a man should not think of a women he is not married to. Unless you are thinking of your wife, while doing it.... which most men are not.... then they are sinning.

Equally, some men would rather please themselves, than please their wives. And that is also a sin. But next time, do real Christians a favor, if you don't understand the Bible, stop pretending you do.

Yes, according to the bible it is. Get over yourself.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You're a clown, you got that right. Actually, the bible doesn't talk about masturbation. Once again you get caught making your shit up

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am sure that "Christian" bakers have sold cakes to lots of gay people, but didn't know.
And I am QUITE sure that they have sold sweet goods to masturbators out there as well.
Masturbation is classified as a deadly sin in the Bible. The Book of Genesis (Beresheet), chapter 38, is dedicated to this:

Onan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

Early Rabbis argued that this was about masturbation. Catholics argue that this story is about contracepted sex.

Either way, if your seed lands on the earth, you die, according to the Bible...


So, why are those bakers selling sweet stuff to all those masturbators out there?

eeek!!!

I agree. If I do not know what the cake is for, then I am not held accountable for it. But if they tell me "This is for an SSM", then I would have to say 'no'.

Because that would violate my religious views.

No, Masturbation is not 'classified' as a sin. Moron lol. This is what happens when pagans read the Bible, and think they understand what they are reading. The sin that Onan committed is that he did not want to raise up a child in his brothers name, which is required in the law of Moses. He spilled his seed on the ground to avoid doing his duty to his brothers wife. Why, we don't know. But nevertheless, he sinned in refusing to do his duty, and G-d struck him down for it.

Now I would agree that a Christian male should not masturbate. He should use his energy to please his wife, and his wife him. The Bible says that a man should not think of a women he is not married to. Unless you are thinking of your wife, while doing it.... which most men are not.... then they are sinning.

Equally, some men would rather please themselves, than please their wives. And that is also a sin. But next time, do real Christians a favor, if you don't understand the Bible, stop pretending you do.

Yes, according to the bible it is. Get over yourself.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You're a clown, you got that right. Actually, the bible doesn't talk about masturbation. Once again you get caught making your shit up

Yes, it does. Thanks for showing your ignorance.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sanctuary cities: No big deal, that's fine, these are good people

Businesses not allowing legal guns: Hey, that's up to the business, who can blame them

Illegal pot smoking: Big deal, leave 'em alone, they're not hurting anyone

Won't bake a cake: HOLY CRAP, THROW THE BOOK AT 'EM, DESTROY THEM, MAKE THEM PAY A $135,000 FINE!!!



.

Hey, if you feel that your civil rights have been violated, then you are also entitled to file a suit.

You don't understand the law much do you? It's not simply about filing suit, the government has a duty to protect your rights.

Another red herring fail.

Specific rights are a judgment call. That's why we have judges.

 

[Seawytch]

Some people interpret the bible to be against masturbation, blacks marrying whites and consenting adult gays marrying each other...they're all wrong.

 

[Staidhup]

The fact is this law suit was filed for nothing more than an act of revenge, greed, and sensationalism because they couldn't keep their choice of life style to them selves. Wow, vindictive little bitch's aren't they.

 

[Pop23]

Sanctuary cities: No big deal, that's fine, these are good people

Businesses not allowing legal guns: Hey, that's up to the business, who can blame them

Illegal pot smoking: Big deal, leave 'em alone, they're not hurting anyone

Won't bake a cake: HOLY CRAP, THROW THE BOOK AT 'EM, DESTROY THEM, MAKE THEM PAY A $135,000 FINE!!!



.

Hey, if you feel that your civil rights have been violated, then you are also entitled to file a suit.

You don't understand the law much do you? It's not simply about filing suit, the government has a duty to protect your rights.

Another red herring fail.

Specific rights are a judgment call. That's why we have judges.

And it remains the States duty

 

[Statistikhengst]

This thread shall live in infamy!

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk