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

[Aba Incieni]

The bakery would not sell that same cake to a hetero couple. Why should a gay couple deserve something that would not be sold to a straight couple?

Is it because gay people are special people?

The cake image is from the Masterpiece Cakeshop catalog of cakes they sell to different-sex couples. Mr. Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop is the Colorado baker that refused to sell a Wedding Cake to a same-sex couple.

So your saying that one of the bakers that refused to sell a Wedding Cake to a same-sex couple wouldn't sell a cake from their Wedding Cake Catalog to a different-sex couple is just beyond weird.


>>>>

That's what you're saying lol. This cake was somehow different than all the cakes they offered. It wasn't that they don't serve gay people, as I've shown.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's what you're saying lol. This cake was somehow different than all the cakes they offered.

I'm not saying the cake is different if purchased by a same-sex couple than if purchased by a different-sex couple. That is your claim.

I've asked before for an explanation of how they were different and you have run away from the question.

It wasn't that they don't serve gay people, as I've shown.

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.


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

That's what you're saying lol. This cake was somehow different than all the cakes they offered.

I'm not saying the cake is different if purchased by a same-sex couple than if purchased by a different-sex couple. That is your claim.

I've asked before for an explanation of how they were different and you have run away from the question.

It wasn't that they don't serve gay people, as I've shown.

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.


>>>>

Because if the cakes were not different, then there is no case. We know the bakery served gays, so that is not the issue. It was a cake that was not offered to gays or straights or blacks or whites.

Why should the gays get a cake that is somehow different from those offered everyone else. Are they special people?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Because if the cakes were not different, then there is no case. We know the bakery served gays, so that is not the issue. It was a cake that was not offered to gays or straights or blacks or whites.

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.

Why should the gays get a cake that is somehow different from those offered everyone else. Are they special people?

Your attempted strawman argument fails in view of facts agreed to by the bakers, there was never any discussion of design at the Wedding Cake tasting appointment since service was refused as soon as Mr. Klein understood that the party Ms. Klein invited included 2 brides.


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

Because if the cakes were not different, then there is no case. We know the bakery served gays, so that is not the issue. It was a cake that was not offered to gays or straights or blacks or whites.

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.

Why should the gays get a cake that is somehow different from those offered everyone else. Are they special people?

Your attempted strawman argument fails in view of facts agreed to by the bakers, there was never any discussion of design at the Wedding Cake tasting appointment since service was refused as soon as Mr. Klein understood that the party Ms. Klein invited included 2 brides.


>>>>

You haven't made a cogent case at all. I've totally destroyed your c/p's throughout. To the point you simply paste without addressing the issue.

Why were the dykes not served?

 

[WorldWatcher]

You haven't made a cogent case at all. I've totally destroyed your c/p's throughout. To the point you simply paste without addressing the issue.

Actually you haven't you have attempted to deflect and use strawman argument.s

Why were the dykes not served?

Because they were lesbians seeking a Wedding Cake for their wedding. Wedding cakes being a product the baker normally supplied.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

>


Outta here, gotta hit the road.


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

You haven't made a cogent case at all. I've totally destroyed your c/p's throughout. To the point you simply paste without addressing the issue.

Actually you haven't you have attempted to deflect and use strawman argument.s

Why were the dykes not served?

Because they were lesbians seeking a Wedding Cake for their wedding. Wedding cakes being a product the baker normally supplied.


>>>>

Because they were lesbians? The baker serves lesbians.

Because they were seeking a wedding cake? The baker offered them a wedding cake.

Did they demand some product that the baker didn't sell to anyone else because they're special people?

 

[paperview]

You haven't made a cogent case at all. I've totally destroyed your c/p's throughout. To the point you simply paste without addressing the issue.

Actually you haven't you have attempted to deflect and use strawman argument.s

Why were the dykes not served?

Because they were lesbians seeking a Wedding Cake for their wedding. Wedding cakes being a product the baker normally supplied.


>>>>

Not sure if you missed it earlier, but the exact cake they wanted was this one:

"Fanasty Fruit-filled cake: Fluffy white cake filled with your choice of berry and a white chocolate cream."
Signature Cakes Menu - Sweet Cakes

It's straight from their standard "Signature" menu. The consumers get to decide what fruit filling they want...(they wanted raspberry, just like the bakers sold their straight mother for her wedding a few years back) --

So this part about "custom" cake should be thrown out the window. Other than: I pick strawberry!

 

[Aba Incieni]

You haven't made a cogent case at all. I've totally destroyed your c/p's throughout. To the point you simply paste without addressing the issue.

Actually you haven't you have attempted to deflect and use strawman argument.s

Why were the dykes not served?

Because they were lesbians seeking a Wedding Cake for their wedding. Wedding cakes being a product the baker normally supplied.


>>>>

Not sure if you missed it earlier, but the exact cake they wanted was this one:

"Fanasty Fruit-filled cake: Fluffy white cake filled with your choice of berry and a white chocolate cream."
Signature Cakes Menu - Sweet Cakes

It's straight from their standard "Signature" menu. The consumers get to decide what fruit filling they want...(they wanted raspberry, just like the bakers sold their straight mother for her wedding a few years back) --

So this part about "custom" cake should be thrown out the window. Other than: I pick strawberry!

Those cakes aren't going to bake themselves. They're custom made to order.

Why weren't the dykes served? Did they want something that wasn't offered to everybody, because they're special people?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Because they were lesbians? The baker serves lesbians.

The baker refused to sell the same-sex couple a Wedding Cake.

Because they were seeking a wedding cake? The baker offered them a wedding cake.

No he didn't, he refused to sell them a Wedding Cake. Hence the filing of the complaint.

The baker agreed in the Statement of Facts in the court documents that he refused to sell them a Wedding Cake.

Did they demand some product that the baker didn't sell to anyone else because they're special people?

Nope. The baker routinely produced Wedding Cakes, therefore they didn't not request a product not sold to others.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Those cakes aren't going to bake themselves. They're custom made to order.

Why weren't the dykes served? Did they want something that wasn't offered to everybody, because they're special people?

Well never know if they wanted something special because, and it isn't relevant to the case.

According to court documents that the bakers agreed to the the Statement of Facts, there was never any discussion as to anything special. The baker refused serviced based on who the customers were, not they requested a product not normally offered (i.e. Wedding Cakes).


>>>>

 

[dblack]

According to court documents that the bakers agreed to the the Statement of Facts, there was never any discussion as to anything special. The baker refused serviced based on who the customers were, not they requested a product not normally offered (i.e. Wedding Cakes).

That's what make these laws so interesting, and so dangerous. They aren't targeting harm to victims. The bakers could have easily avoided prosecution by making up some other reason (one not covered by 'protected classes'). The real target here is the expression of unpopular biases.

 

[Political Junky]

Those bakers should have baked that stupid cake and put ground up glass in it. Or strychnine.

OMG You people are something else, wishing death on everybody. You do realize that wanting people to die because you disagree with them isn't Christian? Or American? Or anything you pretend to value?

And they bitch about extreme Muslims throwing gays off of roofs.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's what make these laws so interesting, and so dangerous. They aren't targeting harm to victims. The bakers could have easily avoided prosecution by making up some other reason (one not covered by 'protected classes'). The real target here is the expression of unpopular biases.

What is scary also is that Public Accommodation laws (as applied to private businesses) are mostly supported, until such time as an individuals pet belief is the one getting gored.

A person utters the magic works "religious belief" as their reason for discrimination and they should be exempt from generally applicable laws.

However someone else want's to perform the exact same behavior (i.e. discrimination) but not for a religious reason and they are not exempt.

If a baker doesn't want to make a cake for a black, a Jew, a lesbian, a Mexican, a divorcee, or a veteran - the basis of WHY shouldn't be relevant. It should be the prerogative of the individual under rights of property and association to say "No".

Under current law it's not legal for a Christian baker to discriminate against gays in (IIRC) 21 States. But it is illegal in all 50 States for a gay baker to discriminate against outspoken Christian who denigrates homosexuals for religious reasons.


>>>>>

 

[Bob Blaylock]

86 pages and not one leftist has figured out that they are anti-Constitutional in their stance.


simply irrefutable proof that leftism is a contagious brain tumor.

It's not that they don't know. It's that they don't care.

 

[Pop23]

Curious,

If the baker subcontracted the work out, to satisfy his religious beliefs (someone else created the cake and made the profit, the Baker is just the middleman) how would that sit under the PA laws?

I would think it would be fine. The relationship is between the customer and the business. How the business supplies the product is irrelevant.

Not at all. If the Baker didn’t do the same for straight couples I would think he would still be violating the law.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Because they were lesbians? The baker serves lesbians.

The baker refused to sell the same-sex couple a Wedding Cake.

Because they were seeking a wedding cake? The baker offered them a wedding cake.

No he didn't, he refused to sell them a Wedding Cake. Hence the filing of the complaint.

The baker agreed in the Statement of Facts in the court documents that he refused to sell them a Wedding Cake.

Did they demand some product that the baker didn't sell to anyone else because they're special people?

Nope. The baker routinely produced Wedding Cakes, therefore they didn't not request a product not sold to others.


>>>>

Your statement of fact is lacking pertinent details and is in fact misleading.

He refused to sell them a cake he did not sell to anyone else.

Maybe they think they're special people because they're dykes.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Those cakes aren't going to bake themselves. They're custom made to order.

Why weren't the dykes served? Did they want something that wasn't offered to everybody, because they're special people?

Well never know if they wanted something special because, and it isn't relevant to the case.

According to court documents that the bakers agreed to the the Statement of Facts, there was never any discussion as to anything special. The baker refused serviced based on who the customers were, not they requested a product not normally offered (i.e. Wedding Cakes).


>>>>

I've quoted the baker as stating they served gay people.

 

[bodecea]

The bakery would not sell that same cake to a hetero couple. Why should a gay couple deserve something that would not be sold to a straight couple?

Is it because gay people are special people?

The cake image is from the Masterpiece Cakeshop catalog of cakes they sell to different-sex couples. Mr. Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop is the Colorado baker that refused to sell a Wedding Cake to a same-sex couple.

So your saying that one of the bakers that refused to sell a Wedding Cake to a same-sex couple wouldn't sell a cake from their Wedding Cake Catalog to a different-sex couple is just beyond weird.


>>>>

That's what you're saying lol. This cake was somehow different than all the cakes they offered. It wasn't that they don't serve gay people, as I've shown.

How was this cake "somehow" different than all the other cakes they offered? Describe the difference to us.