The dreaded gay-wedding-cake saga ends: bakers must pay 135 K

[koshergrl]

Including the baker? Isn't the baker simply having their " feelings hurt" by making the cake?

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

 

[koshergrl]

Gays aren't discriminated against in Oregon. They've been welcomed and included..hence the problem.

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Sure they do. If animal sacrifice is sacrilege in my religion, I don't get to randomly slit the throats of stray cats do I?

Wow so many layers of stupidity in two sentences.

No, you don't get to dictate what is sacrilege for other people.

And you obviously don't know what sacrilege means, so perhaps you should shut up and look it up. You're seriously embarrassing yourself.

 

[boedicca]

Including the baker? Isn't the baker simply having their " feelings hurt" by making the cake?

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Words have no fixed definitions for them. They are Orwellian.

 

[saveliberty]

Not true. You can't just break the law and cite some made up religious belief as a defense. I recall a church in Miami trying that idiocy as a defense for smoking weed. That turned out even worse for them than it did for Sweet Cakes.

Oh, you got us now, yep we JUST made up the sexual sin of homosexuality last month...wait...

 

[Seawytch]

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Sure they do. If animal sacrifice is sacrilege in my religion, I don't get to randomly slit the throats of stray cats do I?

Wow so many layers of stupidity in two sentences.

No, you don't get to dictate what is sacrilege for other people.

And you obviously don't know what sacrilege means, so perhaps you should shut up and look it up. You're seriously embarrassing yourself.

We can determine if the practice of your faith violates the law...like animal sacrifice and discrimination in public accommodation.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

"Goal: $150,000
127%"

Lolol...

Click to support Help Sweetcakes by melissa

Great! Now WTF are you bitching about again? Seemed to work out great for your " oppressed" brethren.

 

[saveliberty]

If I meld everyone's opinion here, the left gets to defend hatred of religion now.

 

[koshergrl]

"Goal: $150,000
127%"

Lolol...

Click to support Help Sweetcakes by melissa

Great! Now WTF are you bitching about again? Seemed to work out great for your " oppressed" brethren.

Oh look, another person I don't know who apparently follows me. You fans are creepy.

 

[Faun]

Any blacks being discriminated against are harmed, regardless if it is "miniscule." Same with gays in Oregon.

Gays aren't discriminated against in Oregon. They've been welcomed and included..hence the problem.

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Moron, I've already given you an example where a state did exactly what you idiotically think they cannot do. Religion is not a shield from the law. Damn, are you idiots idiotic.

 

[Seawytch]

Not true. You can't just break the law and cite some made up religious belief as a defense. I recall a church in Miami trying that idiocy as a defense for smoking weed. That turned out even worse for them than it did for Sweet Cakes.

Oh, you got us now, yep we JUST made up the sexual sin of homosexuality last month...wait...

instructions on how to treat one’s slaves. Slavery is not legal—and even the most devout can’t own any human beings. Are Christian’s less free because of this?

Segregation was fueled by the belief that black people had the mark of Cain. Segregation is not legal. Are Christian’s less free because of this?

Mutilations for punishments are abundant in the Bible for various crimes including theft and being a prostitute. This has been a practice of the Christian World for ages. The Eighth Amendment barred them; they are illegal. Are Christians less free?

No, and no one would dare to make that argument. Those battles have been won. American Christians live with a secular government that “forces” them to not live biblically every day and largely they’re fine with it.

But homosexuality is an abomination—an affront to god—according to the Bible, you say?

Usury is condemned as an abomination in the Bible. Charging interest is legal—even egregious amounts to poor people. These moneychangers are on every corner. Are Christians being threatened by this offense to god?

There are plenty of other abominations which are suspiciously glossed over by the modern faithful, like obesity, not covering your head, wearing wool blends, eating shellfish, being rich—all condemned and punished severely in the Christian Bible. None of them are against the law. Christians don’t claim their freedom is being impeded by these facts or that it’s so offensive to their faith they can’t run a business.

Christians turn a blind eye to all kinds of offenses to their religion. So why the hang-up on homosexuality? Why do American Christians suddenly feel like they are being hurt by other people living their lives? Why do Christians who own businesses all of a sudden feel put upon?

Tina Dupuy Column Freedom Isn t a Zero-Sum Game

 

[koshergrl]

Gays aren't discriminated against in Oregon. They've been welcomed and included..hence the problem.

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Moron, I've already given you an example where a state did exactly what you idiotically think they cannot do. Religion is not a shield from the law. Damn, are you idiots idiotic.

Shut up until you're smart enough to participate in this discussion. And please look up those words you use, you're using them wrong.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Including the baker? Isn't the baker simply having their " feelings hurt" by making the cake?

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

 

[saveliberty]

What you have here is separation of church and state, unless the state gets enough people to ignore that, then they can cross the line.

 

[boedicca]

Gays aren't discriminated against in Oregon. They've been welcomed and included..hence the problem.

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Moron, I've already given you an example where a state did exactly what you idiotically think they cannot do. Religion is not a shield from the law. Damn, are you idiots idiotic.

Government is not an excuse to destroy religion.

Just sayin'.

 

[Faun]

"Goal: $150,000
127%"

Lolol...

Click to support Help Sweetcakes by melissa

Imbecile.... you said you guys were gonna "break the law."

Paying their fine is not "breaking the law."

Who said it was?

You said your side was going to "break the law." When I laughed at you for that, you posted a site to raise donations for them. Face it, you and your brethren are too cowardly to stand up to the law. That's why Sweet Cakes closed their business; that's why no one else stepped forward to break that law again.

Like I said, y'all learned your lesson from Sweet Cakes.

 

[boedicca]

Including the baker? Isn't the baker simply having their " feelings hurt" by making the cake?

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

 

[saveliberty]

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

I set up a landscape business to be a creative outlet for myself. It so happens people will pay you for that. Now a bunch of well intentioned people feel compelled to tell me how I can use that creative energy. If I refuse their point of view, I am a hater who should withdraw all my rights to create, speak or associate.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

The baker is forced to work by law for those who the baker does not want to work.

That is involuntary servitude - service against the will of the servant.

Again you are a loyal leftist, you seek the end of liberty.

 

[Faun]

Sweet Cakes, which was in Oregon, discriminated against gays.

Wrong. They simply opted not to participate in sacrilege. The state can't force them to participate in sacrilege, nor can they tell them what does, and what doesn't, constitute sacrilege.

Haven't you heard of separation of church and state, statist?

No, of course you haven't, lol.

What sacrilege? There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking a wedding cake. You fundi's are fucking insane.

Gads you people are so easy. That's what being stupid gets you, I suppose.

Again. You don't dictate what is, and what isn't, sacrilege. Nor does the state.

Moron, I've already given you an example where a state did exactly what you idiotically think they cannot do. Religion is not a shield from the law. Damn, are you idiots idiotic.

Government is not an excuse to destroy religion.

Just sayin'.

Government is not destroying religion. But it is protecting society from those who try to use religion as an excuse to break the law.

 

[Seawytch]

Including the baker? Isn't the baker simply having their " feelings hurt" by making the cake?

No, the baker is placed in involuntary servitude.

You are a leftist, thus dedicated to the eradication of civil rights, so the act of placing enemies of the party in defacto slavery pleases you.

Defacto slavery? Involuntary servitude?
I think if you offer your services to the public then your servitude is quite voluntary.

Another word you people don't understand, apparently.

I'm beginning to think the whole problem with totalitarians is that they just don't know what the words they use, mean.

Really?
Selling goods to people in the business that you built to sell goods to people is involuntary servitude?

Yes, it is, if one is not free to choose one's customers.

You have not had said freedom since 1964. You're just getting het up about it now?

Hmmmm...wonder why that is