Local Pennsylvania bridal shop harassed and threatened by LGBT activist after turning away same sex

[badger2]

Cakemaker tweaks precisely because she's a xian female!

 

[BS Filter]

The Christian bakers that refuse to print a message on the cake that endorses queer marriage.

Name them. And the messages they refused to put on a cake.

Name the muslim bakeries targeted by the queer mafia.

WHAT "queer mafia"? Shoppers? Shoppers don't know from advertising whether somebody running a business is involved in one of these queer cults? How could they?

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

 

[BS Filter]

I wish people that call themselves Christians and don't believe the Bible would identify themselves so we know right away who the wolves in sheep's clothing are.

WHich bible?

My, aren't you the coy one!

I'm asking a serious question....you DO know that there are several versions out there, right?

If you're referring to differences such as the King James Bible and the New International version, these are only differences in wording but the message is the same from Bible to Bible. Unless you're referring to versions that actually convey a different message or give different specifics such as "Jesus wept" as opposed to "Jesus said 'Fuck!'" that I don't know about.

Not at all...there are many differences...some to the point that some christian sects will accept only one compared to the others.......but ultimately, they are ALL translations upon translations upon translations.

Which one do you accept as the Word of God?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I wish people that call themselves Christians and don't believe the Bible would identify themselves so we know right away who the wolves in sheep's clothing are.

WHich bible?

My, aren't you the coy one!

I'm asking a serious question....you DO know that there are several versions out there, right?

If you're referring to differences such as the King James Bible and the New International version, these are only differences in wording but the message is the same from Bible to Bible. Unless you're referring to versions that actually convey a different message or give different specifics such as "Jesus wept" as opposed to "Jesus said 'Fuck!'" that I don't know about.

Not at all...there are many differences...some to the point that some christian sects will accept only one compared to the others.......but ultimately, they are ALL translations upon translations upon translations.

Can you give me examples? I was a Christian at one time and then debated them for many years on forums and I never heard about this sort of thing.

 

[Lysistrata]

Name them. And the messages they refused to put on a cake.

Name the muslim bakeries targeted by the queer mafia.

WHAT "queer mafia"? Shoppers? Shoppers don't know from advertising whether somebody running a business is involved in one of these queer cults? How could they?

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

 

[BS Filter]

Name the muslim bakeries targeted by the queer mafia.

WHAT "queer mafia"? Shoppers? Shoppers don't know from advertising whether somebody running a business is involved in one of these queer cults? How could they?

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

 

[bodecea]

WHAT "queer mafia"? Shoppers? Shoppers don't know from advertising whether somebody running a business is involved in one of these queer cults? How could they?

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

If you can...then do so.

 

[Lysistrata]

WHAT "queer mafia"? Shoppers? Shoppers don't know from advertising whether somebody running a business is involved in one of these queer cults? How could they?

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

 

[BS Filter]

Oh yeah. The queers that enter a Christian business have no idea the owner is a Christian that will refuse to put a message endorsing queer marriage on their cake, huh. Excuse me, my unicorn is double parked.

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

Queer Activists target Christian businesses. Fact. If you don't believe that, great. I really don't care.

 

[Lysistrata]

How does any shopper know that the proprietor is a member of one of these cults?

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

Queer Activists target Christian businesses. Fact. If you don't believe that, great. I really don't care.

You don't seem to understand much. The rest of us don't care about your cult, either, except for its organized aggressive actions against the rest of us. The rest of us owe absolutely nothing to your cult.

 

[emilynghiem]

In July of 2017, a local bridal shop in Pennsylvania received threatening voicemails from LGBT activists, after a same-sex couple was denied service because it violated the shop owners moral obligation to uphold Christian values. Similar organizations have fallen victim to the viciousness of the LGBT supposedly tolerant community. Posted on the Bridal shop’s Facebook page were two voicemails

Local Pennsylvania Bridal Shop Harassed and Threatened By LGBT Activists After Turning Away Same Sex Couple
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CREATING hate where there was none isn't it grand. wait until it all falls down around their superior attitudes and they're all knocked back down on their asses.

Oh my MindWars
Next we will have teenagers suing Dick's for not selling them a gun.
Oh wait, we already have that also. My bad!

 

[BS Filter]

Are you really this dense or just playing? Seriously.

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

Queer Activists target Christian businesses. Fact. If you don't believe that, great. I really don't care.

You don't seem to understand much. The rest of us don't care about your cult, either, except for its organized aggressive actions against the rest of us. The rest of us owe absolutely nothing to your cult.

Then stop going to Christian businesses and do business with your own kind. No one is seeking your business.

 

[badger2]

That the xian cult stigmatizes gays as immoral is immoral, and nazism is morality itself, a case against which is futile.

 

[Lysistrata]

Seriously, how does anyone know what, if any cult, a store proprietor is a member of? You have continually dodged this question. You are trying to put the onus on the public, where it does not belong? The public is not bound to research each emporium before visiting an establishment that supposedly is open to the public, and this research, in any event, could yield nothing as most of these establishments advertise that they welcome the public and hide their cult affiliations while inviting the public to walk through the door. The onus is on the store proprietor, who is bound by laws that apply to businesses.

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

Queer Activists target Christian businesses. Fact. If you don't believe that, great. I really don't care.

You don't seem to understand much. The rest of us don't care about your cult, either, except for its organized aggressive actions against the rest of us. The rest of us owe absolutely nothing to your cult.

Then stop going to Christian businesses and do business with your own kind. No one is seeking your business.

Even if these people were to be granted a special right to discriminate in our huge society, which is not possible, you never answered as to how the public would know a shopkeeper's sect affiliation.

Our "own kind" is humanity. I'm heterosexual, but I try not to patronize any business that discriminates. This is a matter of right and wrong. I can't tell you where in the world you can go and set up the insular separatist community that you wish for. Try an island somewhere.

 

[BS Filter]

I can find out everything I want to know about any business owner. You're obviously playing dumb or really are dumb.

It's not a matter of "playing dumb." You are still trying to dump the responsibility on the general public when it is the responsibility of the proprietor, who is responsible for the business and its advertising. No one in the general public is, or should be, responsible for looking out for them when they maintain an establishment that supposedly is open for business. No person, straight or LGBT, has any responsibility to watch out for them or to disappear quietly to hush up their actions.

Even if you were correct that a consumer must research every business s/he might want to patronize (which you are not), have the advertisements run by these establishments ever included the owner's limitations. I've never seen it. I once looked up a wedding venue that was cited for refusing a same-sex wedding. It advertised itself as (paraphrasing) the perfect place to hold one's special event, with no hint at all that this statement was misleading and it only accepted some events, so nothing would be learned by research anyway.

But anyway, you can't flip the responsibility on the general public.

Moreover, my opinion that allowing some people to dodge the law based on their personal beliefs would cause havoc in a 300 million plus society still stands. It is a ridiculous notion.

Queer Activists target Christian businesses. Fact. If you don't believe that, great. I really don't care.

You don't seem to understand much. The rest of us don't care about your cult, either, except for its organized aggressive actions against the rest of us. The rest of us owe absolutely nothing to your cult.

Then stop going to Christian businesses and do business with your own kind. No one is seeking your business.

Even if these people were to be granted a special right to discriminate in our huge society, which is not possible, you never answered as to how the public would know a shopkeeper's sect affiliation.

Our "own kind" is humanity. I'm heterosexual, but I try not to patronize any business that discriminates. This is a matter of right and wrong. I can't tell you where in the world you can go and set up the insular separatist community that you wish for. Try an island somewhere.

Queer activists do their research and target Christian businesses. If you think these lawsuits are a coincidence, then you're dumber than an empty box of Post Toasties.

 

[LittleNipper]

That the xian cult stigmatizes gays as immoral is immoral, and nazism is morality itself, a case against which is futile.

Modest people should not have to rewrite the Bible in order to appease a select group of individuals who wish to live according to their own values and opinions. A bar isn't free to build next to a school, and yet that is indeed a form of discrimination. Not inviting everyone to one's party is another form of discrimination and yet individuals do it all the time. ALL forms of behavior are not equally productive. Businesses generally do not have a monopoly. There is no reason to treat them as though they do!

I feel strongly that all people should be extended respect. However, respect may just involve taking the time to explain to someone why their business may not be accomodated. One doesn't have to hit someone on the head with the Bible, but one may open it up and reveal the light it contains. Remember the United States protects FREEDOM of RELIGION --- not freedom from it!

 

[Silhouette]

That the xian cult stigmatizes gays as immoral is immoral, and nazism is morality itself, a case against which is futile.

That the gay cult stigmatizes Christians and Muslims as immoral is immoral.

 

[Tilly]

Doesn’t seem like the gay fascists are really that into equality and PA after all. Also they don’t seem to like being on the receiving end of the same threats they regularly dish out to Christians. Hypocrites!
But we knew that already.

Naturally I disagree with the threats from whichever side they emanate.


This evangelist asked a gay bakery to make a traditional marriage cake. Now he may face charges.
April 9, 2015

...In the wake of heated national debate over whether business owners should have the right to refuse to participate in same-sex “weddings” that violate their religious beliefs, Feuerstein, an internet evangelist, decided to see if pro-gay business owners would give him the same deference as a Christian that homosexual activists are demanding Christian business owners give to same-sex couples, even if they disagreed with his worldview.

He made a tape of himself calling Florida-based bakery “Cut the Cake” and asking them to make a cake decorated with the words, “We do not support gay marriage.” As Feuerstein expected, the bakery – which calls itself LGBT-friendly and advertises same-sex “wedding” services in gay publications – refused and hung up the phone.

"We wanted to see if a pro-LGBT bakery would bake a cake for something that it was opposed to what they believed in,” Feuerstein told Florida’s WESH 2 News, “and you know what, I actually believe that Cut the Cake has every right as an American to refuse to print that on a cake.”

Feuerstein posted video of the phone call to YouTube with commentary explaining his position. “Cut the Cake[‘s owner]…refuses to make an anti-gay ‘marriage’ cake, so it obviously violates her principles, and so she doesn’t feel like she should be forced to make the cake,” Feuerstein said in the video. “And yet…there’s all of this hoopla going around because Christian bakeries think that they shouldn’t be forced.”

“Look, this is not about discrimination,” Feuerstein said. “This is about them having the freedom.”

But Cut the Cake’s owner, Sharon Haller, didn’t appreciate being made an example of by Feuerstein. She claims that as soon as Feuerstein’s video was posted, she began receiving dozens of phone calls from his fans and followers placing “fake orders” and telling her and the rest of her bakery staff to “kill ourselves.”

"I'm just afraid because of the type of calls that we were getting that someone is going to attack me in my home," Haller told News 13.

Feuerstein took down his video as soon as he became aware that Haller was receiving harassing phone calls. "I never asked people to call, be hateful or boycott them," Feuerstein told WKMG 6....

This evangelist asked a gay bakery to make a traditional marriage cake. Now he may face charges.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Something that has gone unmentioned throughout this entire discussion is the fact of Trump supporters being denied service at restaurants and businesses. I did a Google search and got a number of hits on four or five prominent cases. I was wondering if any of those criticizing the bridal shop owner had anything to say about this.

 

[Silhouette]

Something that has gone unmentioned throughout this entire discussion is the fact of Trump supporters being denied service at restaurants and businesses. I did a Google search and got a number of hits on four or five prominent cases. I was wondering if any of those criticizing the bridal shop owner had anything to say about this.

Good point. He would be shunned because he is a republican? Would they be able to legally shun him if he was a gay republican?