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

[editec]

Nobody FORCED them out of business.

What a load of whining nonsense.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

A year ago I would have said 'good.' But actually seeing that it happened, - I don't like how this feels. They shouldn't have been treated as they have been treated, not in my estimation.

Some of those threats were shocking. One emailer wished for the couple’s children to fall ill. Another expressed hope that Mr. Klein should be shot and even raped, The Blaze reported.

And yet another wrote: “Here’s hoping you go out of business, you bigot.”
The couple said on top of that, their vendors were “badgered and harassed” into stopping all associations with the bakery.

The Kleins say they’re now closing up their doors and moving their operations to their home. Their business, they say, has suffered a serious revenue hit from the unexpected activism and backlash.

Looks like they need a Chik-Fil-A-type support system.

Hey they chose to ignore the market and lost the good will of the community.

it was stupid of them to risk their livelihood over this issue.

 

[BDBoop]

Do fags have to abide by the law?

The homosexual couple were not in the wrong here. The bakers were.

agreed.... the bakers should have said they were booked up and could not take any more orders.

Exactly!!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is just like limbaugh/beck losing listeners and just like the increase of business to Chick filet.

Don't blame gays for this. People can choose where to spend their money.

Also note that this is not gays boycotting. There aren't enough gays in the entire country to make up for straights who simply stopped shopping there.

The article says it was a hate campaign. Is the article untrue?

The bakery will do just fine, better than ever, and not have to compromise.

Of course the bakery is waging a "hate campaign". And, so are those who disagree with them.

So? I hate that these people have chosen to use god as an excuse to spread hate but that's their choice and I support their right to be stupid and backward.

I also support the right of those who choose not to shop there.

However, I disagree with those who have called the bakery.

If the non-christian bakery is doing so well, why have they had to give up their storefront?

Question - why don't haters like you support those who choose not to shop there?

 

[Katzndogz]

Do fags have to abide by the law?

The homosexual couple were not in the wrong here. The bakers were.

agreed.... the bakers should have said they were booked up and could not take any more orders.

Maybe lying is against their religion.

What they should have done was just not offer wedding cakes at all. They make wedding cakes only as arranged privately. The judge in the photographer case put the rules down very clearly. If you offer the service to the public, you are bound by public accommodation laws. Don't offer the service to the public.

 

[BDBoop]

The homosexual couple were not in the wrong here. The bakers were.

agreed.... the bakers should have said they were booked up and could not take any more orders.

Maybe lying is against their religion.

What they should have done was just not offer wedding cakes at all. They make wedding cakes only as arranged privately. The judge in the photographer case put the rules down very clearly. If you offer the service to the public, you are bound by public accommodation laws. Don't offer the service to the public.

Except then they should also have denied service to all the people in the 'punked' article I linked.

Right?

Right.

 

[martybegan]

sure and why don't we go back to refusing black people a ride on the front of the bus while we are at it.

buses are usually a government funded service, and thus are required to provide equal services for equal cost.

Bakers are usually not government funded, nor do they have an irreplaceable role in interstate or even intrastate commerce.

 

[Katzndogz]

This is just like limbaugh/beck losing listeners and just like the increase of business to Chick filet.

Don't blame gays for this. People can choose where to spend their money.

Also note that this is not gays boycotting. There aren't enough gays in the entire country to make up for straights who simply stopped shopping there.

The article says it was a hate campaign. Is the article untrue?

The bakery will do just fine, better than ever, and not have to compromise.

Of course the bakery is waging a "hate campaign". And, so are those who disagree with them.

So? I hate that these people have chosen to use god as an excuse to spread hate but that's their choice and I support their right to be stupid and backward.

I also support the right of those who choose not to shop there.

However, I disagree with those who have called the bakery.

If the non-christian bakery is doing so well, why have they had to give up their storefront?

Question - why don't haters like you support those who choose not to shop there?

I choose the right of the bakers to not offer their goods to the public at large and limit their clientele to Christians only if they wish. They were pushed into doing what they should have done from the very beginning.

 

[Skull Pilot]

sure and why don't we go back to refusing black people a ride on the front of the bus while we are at it.

buses are usually a government funded service, and thus are required to provide equal services for equal cost.

Bakers are usually not government funded, nor do they have an irreplaceable role in interstate or even intrastate commerce.

I believe they had the right to refuse service but now they have to pay the price of the loss of good will.

It was their choice it is now their consequence.

All good.

In this day and age I do not know why any business owner would risk offending the people in the market he serves.

It's just plain old stupid.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They are closing the retail outlet, not going out of business. What this baker is doing is exactly what she should be doing, selling her goods privately. She won't lose any customers, they will still buy from her with direct sales. She will find stores and other outlets for sales. Meanwhile, she will have no overhead. The gay couple STILL could not force her to bake their cake and now the baker won't have the question come up anymore. She kept her business and her freedom of religion. It turned out exactly the way it should.

I think you seem to misunderstand. "Sweet Cakes by Melisa" is not going out of business, they will still be operating under an Oregon Business License and (from the articles I've read) they will still be functioning as a Public Accommodation business because they will continue to advertise to the public. There website is still up and listing the services they offer to the public (Home - Sweet Cakes).

Just because the will be operating out of their home does not change the nature of their business.


I'm sure you remember the NM Photographer case? Elaine's Photopgraphy was operated out of their home, they did not have a studio.



>>>>

 

[syrenn]

Okay, well; now that you're done making it all about you, care to discuss the subject of the OP?

the idea was to force them out of business....or kowtow to their gay agenda.

That's what I told somebody by PM. Fine, you want to 'teach them a lesson' or whatever, spread the word, take your money and walk, etc. But going after their vendors (in my estimation) - they went too far. That meant they couldn't honor the jobs they did have.

the refused in the wrong way......

personally i would NOT want someone who did not want to service me....making my cake.

 

[Skull Pilot]

They are closing the retail outlet, not going out of business. What this baker is doing is exactly what she should be doing, selling her goods privately. She won't lose any customers, they will still buy from her with direct sales. She will find stores and other outlets for sales. Meanwhile, she will have no overhead. The gay couple STILL could not force her to bake their cake and now the baker won't have the question come up anymore. She kept her business and her freedom of religion. It turned out exactly the way it should.

I think you seem to misunderstand. "Sweet Cakes by Melisa" is not going out of business, they will still be operating under an Oregon Business License and (from the articles I've read) they will still be functioning as a Public Accommodation business because they will continue to advertise to the public. There website is still up and listing the services they offer to the public (Home - Sweet Cakes).

Just because the will be operating out of their home does not change the nature of their business.


I'm sure you remember the NM Photographer case? Elaine's Photopgraphy was operated out of their home, they did not have a studio.



>>>>

Moving from an established retail location to the basement of your home is the death knell of your business.

 

[Katzndogz]

agreed.... the bakers should have said they were booked up and could not take any more orders.

Maybe lying is against their religion.

What they should have done was just not offer wedding cakes at all. They make wedding cakes only as arranged privately. The judge in the photographer case put the rules down very clearly. If you offer the service to the public, you are bound by public accommodation laws. Don't offer the service to the public.

Except then they should also have denied service to all the people in the 'punked' article I linked.

Right?

Right.

They should have denied making wedding cakes period, then chosen who to bake them for privately. The rules were very clear in the photographer case. They were sensible. They satisfied everyone except those who want to force others to do something they don't want to do.

If a bakery does not advertise wedding cakes and puts up a sign saying they don't bake wedding cakes, then bakes a wedding cake as a special request, they don't have to bake cakes for same sex wedding cakes because that is not a service available to the public.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They can keep their vendors, just change the name, or sell to stores who use their own label.

That would be a change to their business model, up until this point there have been no "venders" the bakers sell directly to the public.

They of course are free to change their business model to one where they sell cakes to another bakery and/or store and then the other business does sales.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

For private enterprises there shouldnt be anti-discrimination laws.

The government is another matter.

I agree, private business should be able to discriminate based on any criteria they determine fits their business model including race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion. (And yes I'm serious.)

Public Accommodation laws should apply to government entities and of course bar them from doing business with discriminatory businesses, but private businesses should not be limited.


>>>>

 

[Skull Pilot]

For private enterprises there shouldnt be anti-discrimination laws.

The government is another matter.

I agree, private business should be able to discriminate based on any criteria they determine fits their business model including race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion. (And yes I'm serious.)

Public Accommodation laws should apply to government entities and of course bar them from doing business with discriminatory businesses, but private businesses should not be limited.


>>>>

And those businesses can pay the price if their discrimination offends those in the market they serve.

That's free enterprise the way it's supposed to be. the market decides which business lives or dies

 

[Luissa]

When gay bars, clubs, coffee shops and restaurants refuse entry to women( pun not intended) should women boycott those venues?
Is there a law preventing such elitist segregation?
Reports of increasing assaults in PTown MA against the local fishing community.
The breeders are being forced out.

i have never been ask to leave a gay bar....you do realize that a gay bar allows male and female gays...

the only time anything has been closed off to me...i was in a gay book store for men....i was ask to stay in the front of the bookstore and not to enter the back areas which were reading rooms for the men only.....i thought the term 'reading rooms' was polite and quaint lol

I know all about Gay Bars.
I worked as a doorman at a club in manchesters village for 3 years.
Some have a men only rule, others have a women only rule.
Most have a no straight rule.

No they don't, liar.

 

[Katzndogz]

They are closing the retail outlet, not going out of business. What this baker is doing is exactly what she should be doing, selling her goods privately. She won't lose any customers, they will still buy from her with direct sales. She will find stores and other outlets for sales. Meanwhile, she will have no overhead. The gay couple STILL could not force her to bake their cake and now the baker won't have the question come up anymore. She kept her business and her freedom of religion. It turned out exactly the way it should.

I think you seem to misunderstand. "Sweet Cakes by Melisa" is not going out of business, they will still be operating under an Oregon Business License and (from the articles I've read) they will still be functioning as a Public Accommodation business because they will continue to advertise to the public. There website is still up and listing the services they offer to the public (Home - Sweet Cakes).

Just because the will be operating out of their home does not change the nature of their business.


I'm sure you remember the NM Photographer case? Elaine's Photopgraphy was operated out of their home, they did not have a studio.



>>>>

Moving from an established retail location to the basement of your home is the death knell of your business.

Of course not. Plenty of businesses are home based and never get beyond that. I know several myself. Some grow into off site locations and still don't open to the public. This could easily grow into an entire Christian network of businesses that aren't open to the public.

 

[BDBoop]

I think you seem to misunderstand. "Sweet Cakes by Melisa" is not going out of business, they will still be operating under an Oregon Business License and (from the articles I've read) they will still be functioning as a Public Accommodation business because they will continue to advertise to the public. There website is still up and listing the services they offer to the public (Home - Sweet Cakes).

Just because the will be operating out of their home does not change the nature of their business.


I'm sure you remember the NM Photographer case? Elaine's Photopgraphy was operated out of their home, they did not have a studio.



>>>>

Moving from an established retail location to the basement of your home is the death knell of your business.

Of course not. Plenty of businesses are home based and never get beyond that. I know several myself. Some grow into off site locations and still don't open to the public. This could easily grow into an entire Christian network of businesses that aren't open to the public.

I hope you warmed up first. It'd be a shame to see you sprain something, stretching that hard.

 

[Katzndogz]

They can keep their vendors, just change the name, or sell to stores who use their own label.

That would be a change to their business model, up until this point there have been no "venders" the bakers sell directly to the public.

They of course are free to change their business model to one where they sell cakes to another bakery and/or store and then the other business does sales.


>>>>

According to the article, they had vendors who has also been the victims of gay hate.