The Civil Rights' Double-Edged Sword: Time To Silence The Rogue Judge In Oregon Instead.

[Silhouette]

3 people have now committed to approaching the Oregon Committee on judicial fitness. Good. Let's hope a dozen or a hundred more will join them in filing complaints about ANY judge who suppresses ANY civil right. The 9th Amendment to the Constitution tells us that the 1st Amendment's civil rights guarantees are equally as important as any other. That judge used the same law to at once violate civil rights in order to "uphold civil rights". Ironic. There's no civil right I know of that allows one person to command another person under pain of financial or other punishment to approve of behaviors.

 

[daws101]

3 people have now committed to approaching the Oregon Committee on judicial fitness. Good. Let's hope a dozen or a hundred more will join them in filing complaints about ANY judge who suppresses ANY civil right. The 9th Amendment to the Constitution tells us that the 1st Amendment's civil rights guarantees are equally as important as any other. That judge used the same law to at once violate civil rights in order to "uphold civil rights". Ironic. There's no civil right I know of that allows one person to command another person under pain of financial or other punishment to approve of behaviors.

as compared to the millions who have not ...I hate fucking faux crusaders ...

 

[Silhouette]

Well, right, more people should get up and fight for traditional marriage. I agree. But one person is enough to launch an investigation that the Oregon judge violated the 1st Amendment civil rights of the Christian baker couple....violated them twice. 1. When they essentially forced to pay up for not worshipping a false idol (the cule of LGBTs values) and 2. When they were gagged and silenced from speaking out about that civil rights violation.

That judge belongs in prison.

 

[Silhouette]

Yesterday — just in time for the Fourth of July holiday — Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian issued his long-awaited ruling against Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of the since-closed Sweet Cakes by Melissa. Finding them guilty of sexual orientation discrimination for refusing to bake a cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding, Avakian not only ordered the Kleins to pay $135,000 in “emotional damages” to the complaining lesbian couple, he also slapped a gag order on them, ordering them to “cease and desist” from “publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation.” In other words, if the Kleins continue to proclaim their unwillingness to celebrate gay marriage in their business activities, they’re in likely violation of Avakian’s order. Oregon Slaps Christian Bakers With a Fine and Gag Order for Refusing to Help Celebrate Gay Wedding National Review Online

So that's it. The civil rights violating judge's name is "Brad Avakian". Turn Brad Avakian in for suppression of the baker's 1st Amendment rights to passively adhere to their faith, and his choking off their speech by refusing to allow them to even talk about that crime against their 1st Amendment civili rights..

Again, here's the link on how to launch an investigation against judge/commissioner Avakian: CJFD Home - Complaint Process It gives a very simple flow chart on what you need. Here's the actual form to fill out: http://courts.oregon.gov/CJFD/docs/040105RevisedComplaintForm.pdf

Since this was a process of "justice", that may apply, or you might have to lodge your complaints with Brad Avakian's office, in which his underlings will protect him, but here goes anyway: Civil Rights Division BOLI S CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT PROCESS

 

[Dana7360]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

And this judge should remember: ignorance of the law is no excuse.. Each and every single judge in the US should do a quick refresher course on the 9th Amendment to the US Constitution. Unemployment can be such a bitch.

If two claimed rights are in conflict, one HAS to win out.

The right to deny a right cannot constitutionally exist. One HAS to be determined not to be a right. That's what judges do.

Discriminating against someone isn't religion.

No one is stopping anyone from practicing their religion.

So no one has violated anyone's right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is that the state is preventing some christians from forcing their personal religion on everyone else.

Which is what the state is supposed to do. The christians who are trying to force their religion on everyone else are violating the constitution by denying everyone else their right to freedom of religion.

A business isn't a church and baking a cake isn't religion. It's business and all businesses have to follow the law. Just because someone is christian doesn't exempt them from the law.

 

[daws101]

the most amazing thing about this "issue" is that before it came to light (that gay people did business like everybody else) were the so called Christian business owners so clueless that they did not know or could not tell that some of their costumers were gay.?

 

[Pop23]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

 

[Moonglow]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

The men are not against the idea, just the women....Well these cases are not really about equal access but a grab a quick dough...

 

[Pop23]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

The men are not against the idea, just the women....

Agreed, not that it matters with the public accomodations laws as they are written.

I wonder if most women understood what this new equality would look like?

 

[Silhouette]

PA laws can't trump other civil rights.

 

[Silhouette]

The PA laws in Oregon say they protect civil rights. All of them. Not just the LGBT favorites. All of them include the 1st Amendment civil right. That judge/administrator Brad what's his name violated the bakers' civil rights twice. 1. When he ruled they had to pay $135K for refusing to participate in an event their religion expressly forbids and 2. Gagging their right to talk about the offense in #1.

That's like a perp raping a woman and then telling her if she talks to authorities about it, he's going to shoot her pet dog for good measure. That judge belongs in federal prison. At the very least the bakers should dethrone him using Oregon's oversight laws on judicial/adminstrative misconduct and then sue him as a private citizen for violating the very law he cited to fine and gag them. Which would be exceedingly simple to do. All one would have to do is cite the 9th Amendment to the US Constitution and the Oregon law saying civil rights may not be violated.

 

[bendog]

The 9th amendment? Seriously. I mean I'm not a fan of Oregon's PA law .... but the 9th Amendment? LOL

 

[daws101]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

that would not be getting along.
your problem with restrooms and showers is imo just silly.
rest rooms and locker rooms for the most part are segregated due to reasons OF MODESTY and Christian morality .
your fight is not with gays it's with the makers of those laws .

 

[daws101]

PA laws can't trump other civil rights.

neither can your imaginary ones.

 

[daws101]

What does the 9th amendment mean?
The ninth amendment states that any rights not specifically granted to the people by the constitution are not necessarily denied to them either. It was designed to protect the United States federal government from being too powerful.

The exact text reads:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
seem to me the 9th supports the new marriage act .

 

[Pop23]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

that would not be getting along.
your problem with restrooms and showers is imo just silly.
rest rooms and locker rooms for the most part are segregated due to reasons OF MODESTY and Christian morality .
your fight is not with gays it's with the makers of those laws .

Read a few public accomodations laws and get back to me.

MODESTY is a part of a moral attitude.

Good god

 

[Pop23]

Has the equal access law in Oregon been ruled as unconstitutional?The judge is merely following state law...

State law say no civil right may be violated. You don't get to pick favorites and neither does the judge..

It also says that you can't deny access to public and private enterprises based on sexual orientation...

Like heterosexual couples denied the same right millions of times per day to access locker and shower rooms together when gay couples have free access? You realize lesbians look at women the same as men? Right?

It would be great if we could all just get along and allow the baker to deny service on a moral basis, just as the gym owner should be able to deny entrance based on the same.

that would not be getting along.
your problem with restrooms and showers is imo just silly.
rest rooms and locker rooms for the most part are segregated due to reasons OF MODESTY and Christian morality .
your fight is not with gays it's with the makers of those laws .

Kinda true, but those laws were benign until all the chatter about how unfair they were. Let's see how politically unpopular the gay crowd becomes whe these laws have to be changed due to the recent rulings.

Moms are not gonna like it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

PA laws can't trump other civil rights.

You don't have a civil right to not be offended.

 

[bodecea]

Sil has become unhinged. I love it!

Sil have been unhinged for awhile...

 

[Dana7360]

How many times must people be told that business isn't a church and making cakes or taking photos or arranging flowers isn't a religion?

No one is denying these business people their right to worship any god of their choice.

What's happening is that those christians are trying to force other people to follow the christian's religion. The government has the obligation to stop people from violating other people's civil rights and from violating the state PA laws.

Being christian doesn't exempt anyone from any of our laws.

PA laws have been upheld in court for decades so it's perfectly constitutional to hold people accountable if they violate PA laws. If you want to change the law it's your right to do so but until laws are changed you must obey the existing laws.

What is so hard for you crazy right wingers to understand?