Oregon imposes gag order on Christian bakers in gay wedding case

[PaintMyHouse]

No it wasn't.You can bleat all day about your imaginary law but no law was broken. We have a politically correct politician deciding to make a political point to boost himself to higher office soon off the backs of these 2 people who DID NOT base their decision on these carpet muncher's sexual preference but their idea of a wedding which is perfectly fine. NOW he is trying to muzzle them which like I already stated is unconstitutional and illegal and they won't follow it.

Don't break the law...

No law was broken my little tyrant libturd but suppressing speech IS a violation of the first amendment and not allowed. Try to follow along now.

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]"

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

 

[Preacher]

No it wasn't.You can bleat all day about your imaginary law but no law was broken. We have a politically correct politician deciding to make a political point to boost himself to higher office soon off the backs of these 2 people who DID NOT base their decision on these carpet muncher's sexual preference but their idea of a wedding which is perfectly fine. NOW he is trying to muzzle them which like I already stated is unconstitutional and illegal and they won't follow it.

No law was broken my little tyrant libturd but suppressing speech IS a violation of the first amendment and not allowed. Try to follow along now.

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]"

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No it wasn't.You can bleat all day about your imaginary law but no law was broken. We have a politically correct politician deciding to make a political point to boost himself to higher office soon off the backs of these 2 people who DID NOT base their decision on these carpet muncher's sexual preference but their idea of a wedding which is perfectly fine. NOW he is trying to muzzle them which like I already stated is unconstitutional and illegal and they won't follow it.

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]"

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

 

[Preacher]

No it wasn't.You can bleat all day about your imaginary law but no law was broken. We have a politically correct politician deciding to make a political point to boost himself to higher office soon off the backs of these 2 people who DID NOT base their decision on these carpet muncher's sexual preference but their idea of a wedding which is perfectly fine. NOW he is trying to muzzle them which like I already stated is unconstitutional and illegal and they won't follow it.

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

No it wasn't.You can bleat all day about your imaginary law but no law was broken. We have a politically correct politician deciding to make a political point to boost himself to higher office soon off the backs of these 2 people who DID NOT base their decision on these carpet muncher's sexual preference but their idea of a wedding which is perfectly fine. NOW he is trying to muzzle them which like I already stated is unconstitutional and illegal and they won't follow it.

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

And somehow you retards still spew that nobody is being forced to participate in a gay wedding. If you don't it will only cost you 135k to opt out. Because that seems like a fair price to pay for your religious beliefs right?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The law is the law, like it or not...

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

And somehow you retards still spew that nobody is being forced to participate in a gay wedding. If you don't it will only cost you 135k to opt out. Because that seems like a fair price to pay for your religious beliefs right?

All they had to do was what they already did, for money. Business is not faith...

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

I'm looking forward to some law suits making gays perform services for people they don't agree with. I'm guessing doing your job will change quickly.

 

[Preacher]

T

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

They did their job just like any other place does it. They aren't REQUIRED to take ALL people's business. They did NOT discriminate based on sex,race,sexual orientation,disability etc. They merely refused to be APART of a wedding just like a bridesmaid or best man can say no. These faggots decided to do their usual whine and cry part and throw fits instead of merely going to another cake maker.

 

[Preacher]

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

And somehow you retards still spew that nobody is being forced to participate in a gay wedding. If you don't it will only cost you 135k to opt out. Because that seems like a fair price to pay for your religious beliefs right?

All they had to do was what they already did, for money. Business is not faith...

Their business and their faith are one and the same. Just like if a faggot baker didn't want to make a cake for a real couple's wedding I could care less as well and don't think that faggot should be fined either.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

I'm looking forward to some law suits making gays perform services for people they don't agree with. I'm guessing doing your job will change quickly.

Do what you are paid to do, that is all that is required. Leave your faith at home and at church. Baking cakes for cash is not faith.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Fascinating they still didn't break it. The politician himself says WHY he claims they broke it which is completely wrong of what both the normal cake makers have said and the mentally ill carpet munchers said happened.

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

And somehow you retards still spew that nobody is being forced to participate in a gay wedding. If you don't it will only cost you 135k to opt out. Because that seems like a fair price to pay for your religious beliefs right?

All they had to do was what they already did, for money. Business is not faith...

Interesting somebody with no faith is going to tell us all how to act within ours. All they had to do was go get a cake somewhere else. How is that an imposition? Oh, it wasn't. But the lawsuit wasn't about that either. It was about someone having the nerve to tell a gay couple they weren't going to help them sin. The horror.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

They did NOT discriminate based on sex,race,sexual orientation,disability etc.

Yes, they did, which is against the law.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

They are welcome to take that as well to court but truthfully, after having to pay up, they need to learn to follow the laws for now.

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

And somehow you retards still spew that nobody is being forced to participate in a gay wedding. If you don't it will only cost you 135k to opt out. Because that seems like a fair price to pay for your religious beliefs right?

All they had to do was what they already did, for money. Business is not faith...

Interesting somebody with no faith is going to tell us all how to act within ours. All they had to do was go get a cake somewhere else. How is that an imposition? Oh, it wasn't. But the lawsuit wasn't about that either. It was about someone having the nerve to tell a gay couple they weren't going to help them sin. The horror.

They did not have the right to refuse for said reason. That is the law. Obey it or face the consequences...

 

[Preacher]

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

I'm looking forward to some law suits making gays perform services for people they don't agree with. I'm guessing doing your job will change quickly.

Do what you are paid to do, that is all that is required. Leave your faith at home and at church. Baking cakes for cash is not faith.

Your faith is not a shirt you put on and off. Just because I am out and about doesn't mean I no longer believe in my beliefs...same for them. Oh and I am no christian either. So....not defending them because of that. They did what is allowed and right then faggots should have done what 99 out of 100 people would do and went and found someone else willing to take their cash. I know being mentally ill that thought never crossed their diseased minds obviously.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Their business and their faith are one and the same.

They are nothing of the kind, not by law.

 

[Preacher]

They did NOT discriminate based on sex,race,sexual orientation,disability etc.

Yes, they did, which is against the law.

Nope they didn't. Again even the mentally ill faggots said they didn't. ONLY the political hack said they did and he is lying. I bet they served faggots before and could not have cared less...big difference in serving a faggot and making a cake for a faggots wedding.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

They won't be paying up and They are appealing this hopefully all way to supreme court

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

I'm looking forward to some law suits making gays perform services for people they don't agree with. I'm guessing doing your job will change quickly.

Do what you are paid to do, that is all that is required. Leave your faith at home and at church. Baking cakes for cash is not faith.

So if I am paying you for a job you didn't want in the first place and actually refused to take you can now be forced to not only do that job but do it to the person forcing you's satisfaction. I'm searching for a gay owned business. I'm going to make that fucker do some incredibly humiliating shit and if he doesn't he owes me 135k. After all it is what he's paid to do.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And they will lose. The SC has already rejected such things, even before last week. Bake the cake, or be put out of business...

They already closed. So we can thank faggots and carpet munchers for 2 more people on the government dole. Bet your kind is proud the blame is squarely on your shoulders. The cake makers should move to a friendlier less totalitarian fascist state that wants their business.

They should have done their job, in the first place. Had they, they would still be in business.

I'm looking forward to some law suits making gays perform services for people they don't agree with. I'm guessing doing your job will change quickly.

Do what you are paid to do, that is all that is required. Leave your faith at home and at church. Baking cakes for cash is not faith.

Your faith is not a shirt you put on and off. Just because I am out and about doesn't mean I no longer believe in my beliefs...same for them. Oh and I am no christian either. So....not defending them because of that. They did what is allowed and right then faggots should have done what 99 out of 100 people would do and went and found someone else willing to take their cash. I know being mentally ill that thought never crossed their diseased minds obviously.

Had they done what is right, no one would have ever heard of them, and that was to bake the cake, exactly what they were paid to do...

 

[Vigilante]