Anti-Gay cake jerk gets told to take a hike.

[orogenicman]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

What happened to your mantra, "bake the cake", fucking hypocrite.

She offered to bake the cake, farking moron.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's funny. Do some more.

Do you agree that queers should be protected by one law, and Christians by a lesser law?

 

[orogenicman]

The rightwing dinosaurs continue to be annihilated by the asteroid of progess.

Hi NYcarbineer
And I can't wait until medical research and scientific studies
finally establishe that the Christian healing prayers work naturally, safely, free, effectively and voluntarily;
do not force anyone to convert to anything; and work better than marijuana and pharmaceuticals to cure the ROOT CAUSE of most mental and physical illnesses instead of "placating symptoms" and running up costs of health care.

All the current paranoia and rejection of Christianity will be proven to be politically biased, wrongful, and DAMAGING because it denied lifesaving help to so many people who could have been spared death and suffering.

Instead of faulting fundamental Christians for denying medical help from secular science,
it will be shown as many secular zealots with anti-religious agenda have denied lifesaving help from spiritual methods that are completely natural and consistent with science.

I just read today about the outreach to allow terminal people to die.
What about checking if they can be cured first through spiritual methods BEFORE choosing to die? Many people diagnosed as terminal have been cured by addressing the spiritual root cause and facilitating natural healing to overcome diseased conditions.

I can't wait until society progresses to THAT point of stopping this onesided rejection and demonization of Christianity because of paranoid political bias about religion.

Liberals can't seem to recognize that it is a form of bigotry, so I'll just call it onesided.

Science has already shown these methods are effective, so all these critics who have REFUSED to consider the science, study the methods that work, and replicate them should be held just as guilty of negligence "obstructing science and progress of humanity" and denying treatment to sick people instead of just blaming Christians for rejecting science. Fundamentalists on both sides are equally guilty.

Can't wait for that realization to hit, where people see that nobody is more or less to blame.
All groups rejecting each other have censored the free access to knowledge that could have saved more lives.

When do we realize we are equally responsible? And quit pointing fingers at another group we blame more?

Holy batcrap!

 

[Anathema]

There is no double-standard. One is a happy gay couple, and the other is an anti-gay American Taliban asshole. She doesn't make hate cakes, and that's what he wanted. She didn't refuse to serve him because of his faith, she's Catholic, she refused to serve because of his hated. They saw through his BS, and so should you.

Then maybe he should "deliver" a pressure cooker to her business.

 

[OKTexas]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

What happened to your mantra, "bake the cake", fucking hypocrite.

She offered to bake the cake, farking moron.

First no one was talking to you, but how about this scenario. A faghadist walks into a Christian bakery demanding a fag wedding cake. Would you think it would be OK for them to bake the cake and tell the fags to decorate and set it up themselves?

 

[orogenicman]

Congratulations, you found another double standard from the left. Not a hard thing to do.

There is no double-standard. One is a happy gay couple, and the other is an anti-gay American Taliban asshole. She doesn't make hate cakes, and that's what he wanted. She didn't refuse to serve him because of his faith, she's Catholic, she refused to serve because of his hated. They saw through his BS, and so should you.

With that, at 21K, I'm on break. See ya, maybe.

Let me remind you what you said in the other thread:

We don't care who you are, or what you believe, Bake The Stupid Cake, that's your job.

Let me remind you:

"Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes."

Is this in any way unclear? By the way, the Ms. Silva is a Catholic.

 

[Uncensored2008]

She offered to bake the cake, farking moron.

She refused to bake it as it was designed.

You seek the double standard - as the left always does.

You have the elite, whom all must serve, then you have the vermin who are below the law. This is ALWAYS what you of the left do - you will forever strip rights from those whom are not favored of the party.

 

[whitehall]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

Are lefties so filled with hatred for Christians that they are unable to see the hypocrisy?

 

[BULLDOG]

That's funny. Do some more.

Do you agree that queers should be protected by one law, and Christians by a lesser law?

Absolutely not! I don't think Christians should be protected by any law. Public floggings and crucifixions will be implemented soon, and you will all be forced to get gay married to illegal aliens. Your only hope is widespread use of those tinfoil hats.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

First no one was talking to you, but how about this scenario. A faghadist walks into a Christian bakery demanding a fag wedding cake. Would you think it would be OK for them to bake the cake and tell the fags to decorate and set it up themselves?

This is the Obamanation - you will obey the queers. You will not question, you will not comment, you will obey the queers - they are the beloved of the party and thus the rulers of the peasants.

 

[orogenicman]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

What happened to your mantra, "bake the cake", fucking hypocrite.

She offered to bake the cake, farking moron.

First no one was talking to you, but how about this scenario. A faghadist walks into a Christian bakery demanding a fag wedding cake. Would you think it would be OK for them to bake the cake and tell the fags to decorate and set it up themselves?

First, I don't need your permission to respond to a post. This is a public forum. If you want to have a private conversation, you are posting in the wrong forum. Second, I am not under any obligation to answer questions from bigots who can't seem to resist labeling people with derogatory names in public forums. Capiche.

 

[GHook93]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

So hypocritical. She is discriminating against him, because her ideology views it as discriminatory! There is little difference.

If I didn't want to cater a clan rally, under the leftist interpretation I would have to regardless of my beliefs!

 

[orogenicman]

Instead, officials state the evidence shows Silva refused to make the cakes because the customer’s requests included “derogatory language and imagery.”
Read more at Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

So they call the bible derogatory...so ANYONE in Colorado when this OBVIOUS bigoted group decides to fine you for harming some butt fuckers feelings ignore them.

Great idea. Just ignore those fines, and you will find all about butt fucking when they lock you up. You might have more than your feelings hurt.

Diversity police breaking down the door in middle of the night to arrest violators of the diversity policy....sounds like a 1984esque novel. Something scum like you would cheer no doubt.

Well, it should sound like fiction, because it is. I realize right wingers have trouble keeping fiction novels and reality separate, but you should at least try.

What do you expect? They are obsessed with the most popular fiction novel ever written.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Absolutely not! I don't think Christians should be protected by any law. Public floggings and crucifixions will be implemented soon, and you will all be forced to get gay married to illegal aliens. Your only hope is widespread use of those tinfoil hats.

Only if you win.

Look, you of the left are itching for a shooting war. you push and attack in hopes of provoking. What astounds me is that you think you'll come out on top. No one actually wins in a civil war, idiot.

 

[emilynghiem]

The rightwing dinosaurs continue to be annihilated by the asteroid of progess.

Ahahaha what progress? If there was progress you people wouldn't be fighting this stuff in the courts. It wasn't that long ago that California banned gay marriage with 70% of African Americans voting to ban it. Take a victory lap if you like while I point and laugh.

If it wasn't progress you people wouldn't be losing in court.

Dear NYcarbineer
1. yes and no, you could also say if it wasn't a legitimate belief supported by citizens of each state,
then why would amendments, legislation like DOMA, and state bills have PASSED that supported
traditional marriage and defense of marriage?

Both sides have valid beliefs.
The Courts are not designed to CHOOSE between beliefs.
Even if Christianity or Buddhism turn out to be true and universal,
You and I and everyone here KNOWS the Courts are NOT supposed to be used to choose one side over the other.

The system is NOT designed to decide POLITICAL beliefs for people but YES this is ABUSED.
It is STILL wrongful and in violation of both the Fourteenth Amendment and Civil Rights Act
to discriminate by creed.

2. BTW using Courts as the criteria for whether someone's beliefs are valid or not is DANGEROUS.
By that, slavery would still be considered the social norm and "right morals since it was upheld by courts"

Dangerous justification.

The beliefs belong to people, and until we reach a consensus, we are abusing govt
especially courts as "divine right to rule" in favor of one belief over another.

This is not Constitutional to me, and I am a prochoice progressive Democrat and I CAN SEE THAT.

I am not that special, I am just more fed up with paying for the cost of these conflicts.
Other people who have money to lose on funding onesided campaigns don't see the damages caused.

But in my community, where we are losing the national historic Astrodome, two national historic Freed Slave and Civil Rights landmarks of APV within Freedmen's Town, and also on the brink of losing public radio due to debts that aren't being taken seriously; we can't afford to spend millions on political religious wars that could be solved by mediation, and save those resources to save our history and access to democratic free speech and ability to assemble through sites like the Dome and the Freedmen's Town campus plans for this purpose.

We can't afford this fight, over beliefs that should be treated and included equally,
and thus will mean endless legal and legislative battle we can't afford while mediation is free,
while we are losing our historic and environment national treasures due to "lack of funds" and divided public
attention that is diverted to issues of equal beliefs that should be resolved by people directly per state.

NYcarbineer
the most DISTURBING thing to me about your argument
is your support of Constitutional equal protections seems to depend on
WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE WITH SOMEONE'S BELIEF
How dangerous is that?
You and others go so far as to only see Courts and Congress as legit when they back YOUR beliefs,
but when they don't, when legislatures support otherwise then it's "unconstitutional and needs correction"
but when OTHER beliefs are the ones left out and arguing "it's unconstitutional and needs correction"
suddenly the Courts are right and decide what beliefs to mandate for the rest of the nation?

That is NEVER constitutional in my book.
When it comes to beliefs, whether I agree or not, or the majority of a party does,
if people have other beliefs those are still protected by law and can't be forced to change by govt.

I don't even have to AGREE with that belief to defend it equally.
It is disturbing enough when the right gets onesided, as with defending Christian beliefs
but attacking Muslims, but when the LEFT gets onesided and does'nt see that, it's "intolerable"
as well as unconstitutional. At least the Conservatives ACCEPT constitutional rebukes when
confronted on the Muslim issues. I have YET to see my fellow liberal Democrats accept
rebuke that this proselytizing agenda through courts and legislatures is ANTI CHOICE
and violated Separation of Church and State to mandate beliefs on a national scale through govt.

You can use the media to influence people as long as it is based on truth and full and accurate information.
but not abuse govt to establish one set of beliefs as mandatory for the nation.

If you abuse govt and/or party to conspire to violate equal civil rights of others
that is organized racketeering. If media is abused to spread false information,
such as brainwashing people into believing it is constitutional to establish political beliefs
instead of teaching this is "discriminating unlawfully by CREED" that can be part of collusion.

At this point I could see a class action lawsuit against Democrats for colluding to discriminate
against Christians, similar to anti-semitism that has been a historical trend.

This has really gone too far. I will start preparing to go on a political strike against my own party,
and hope that since I am only one person, who is absolutely harmless in that I believe in consent
not coercion, nobody will see me as a threat worth attacking
but will listen to the objections and the solutions which are the real point.

I didn't want to have to go on hunger strike, but just setting up all the fundraising programs for campus plans and democratizing by district, schools and parties, so that I could go on strike later and hand these plans over to candidates and leaders willing to take them over if I don't survive my own protest, might still publicize sustainable solutions we should be funding instead of circular arguments over beliefs that will keep deadlocking because both sides have equal right to defend their beliefs. In preparing to lose my arguments, I could find the people to form a winning team behind the right ideas I would be striking for anyway!

I've had enough NYcarbineer
I am aggrieved for the Democrats who have turned the whole platform anti-choice and don't see it.
Where is the inclusion of diversity? The equal respect and protection of all creeds from discrimination?
Sad sad sad. If I go on hunger strike in June, depending if people get it right before the Courts screw up anything else, what will I be losing anyway if the country is already giving up choice and liberty to govt to decide for us? what kind of country would have ability to have free speech and freedom of choice and religion, but then sell it to the highest corporate bidders to mandate through paid political parties and govt lobbyists?

Why would we pay to enslave ourselves to corporate politics
when our laws protect our free speech, right to petition to redress our own grievances and write out own local laws and pass legislation by consensus that protects all beliefs? We have the ability to buy our own land, schools, and even run our own radio stations and incorporate our own businesses and small cities!
Why isn't that enough to establish and exercise our own beliefs democratically?
Why this need to force political beliefs through govt to mandate for the entire nation?

Sorry but I don't recognize this and don't believe in it.
I will ask for help to either buyout my own district to set up Constitutional process and structures
as my beliefs, or else go on strike and refuse to live under some gestapo govt I don't even recognize.

Not me, not what I believe. You can't make live under a system
that violates my beliefs in govt by consent, Constitutional due process, and equal protection of the laws.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What do you expect? They are obsessed with the most popular fiction novel ever written.

"The Lord of the Rings," Comrade?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Then maybe he should "deliver" a pressure cooker to her business.

No, he should not.

Leave violence to the left.

 

[orogenicman]

And yet another member of the American Taliban gets spanked for being a jerk. Happy days.


The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which earlier ruled a Christian bakery could not refuse to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” marriage, has denied any discrimination took place when another bakery turned down a request to make cakes that including Bible verses labeling homosexual conduct as sin.

Last week, the state agency ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with “groomsmen” X’d out and Bible verses the following Bible verses: “God hates sin. Psalm 45:7,” “Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2,” “God loves sinners” and “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Romans 5:8.”

He told the civil rights agency he ordered the cakes with the imagery and biblical verses to convey that same-sex marriage is, in his words, “un-biblical and inappropriate.”

Marjorie Silva, the owner of the bakery, told Jack that she would make him the Bible-shaped cakes, but would not decorate them with the biblical verses and the image of the groomsmen that he requested. Instead, she offered to provide him with icing and a pastry bag so he could write or draw whatever messages he wished on the cakes.


Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

So hypocritical. She is discriminating against him, because her ideology views it as discriminatory![/There is little difference.

If I didn't want to cater a clan rally, under the leftist interpretation I would have to regardless of my beliefs!

Absolutely not! I don't think Christians should be protected by any law. Public floggings and crucifixions will be implemented soon, and you will all be forced to get gay married to illegal aliens. Your only hope is widespread use of those tinfoil hats.

Only if you win.

Look, you of the left are itching for a shooting war. you push and attack in hopes of provoking. What astounds me is that you think you'll come out on top. No one actually wins in a civil war, idiot.

Wow, this is the typical tripe of fundamentalist loonies - threating a civil war over cake. Congratulations. Instead, I highly recommend a food fight at fifty paces.

 

[orogenicman]

What do you expect? They are obsessed with the most popular fiction novel ever written.

"The Lord of the Rings," Comrade?

The Bible.

 

[emilynghiem]

Instead, officials state the evidence shows Silva refused to make the cakes because the customer’s requests included “derogatory language and imagery.”
Read more at Gay cakes protected anti- gay cakes not

So they call the bible derogatory...so ANYONE in Colorado when this OBVIOUS bigoted group decides to fine you for harming some butt fuckers feelings ignore them.

Great idea. Just ignore those fines, and you will find all about butt fucking when they lock you up. You might have more than your feelings hurt.

Diversity police breaking down the door in middle of the night to arrest violators of the diversity policy....sounds like a 1984esque novel. Something scum like you would cheer no doubt.

Well, it should sound like fiction, because it is. I realize right wingers have trouble keeping fiction novels and reality separate, but you should at least try.

What do you expect? They are obsessed with the most popular fiction novel ever written.

orogenicman
the problem is both sides feel the rulings or laws biased against them
violate their CONSENT, their beliefs and free will/right to choose.

By natural laws, which are not fiction, but are inherent in all human beings
neither side agrees to see govt abused to violate their beliefs and free will.
So both sides are fighting for Equal Constitutional protection of their beliefs.

The Constitutional principles are not fiction either, but based on natural laws we didn't write.
We didn't create human nature, but all people want free will, free exercise of religion,
free choice not to be dictated or discriminated against by govt abused by opposing interests.

Both sides are fighting the same battle, but only to defend their side.
orogenicman isn't this the same age old battle man has always faced since we first became
aware we had individual will, and collective society or will of others to account for,
and the issue of laws to enforce to defend the interests of some over adversity?

This same conflict may arise in every fiction tale, drama, book or movie,
but it is the story of humanity. Everyone I know is "obsessed" with defending their beliefs
and interests from oppression or conflict with others!