Christian bakers who refused cake order for gay wedding forced to close shop

[Alfalfa]

Did anyone stop the baker from practicing his religion or from speaking his mind?

No.

Evidently practicing their religion includes symbolically dragging homos behind their Chevy's.

I hereby christen you a board troll. You'd love nothing more than to drag a Christian behind your Prius.

Ahh, well. I come from a devout Irish Catholic family, 9 years of Catholic School, first communion, confirmation, altar boy (no buggering), the whole nine yards.

I'm saved and devout christians worst nightmare, I know where all the bodies are buried...and I EARNED my right to be critic.

And BTW, I drive a 500SL and i'm a conservative...just not a jebus genuflecting conservative.

Yes, I even spelled genuflecting correctly without the spell check. That ought to scare you a little....heheh....

 

[RKMBrown]

And the next person could just as easily say that it is ridiculous that you can't see the difference between a birthday cake--all people of all definitions have birthdays every year--and a wedding cake that has to be assembled on location.

And in the end it doesn't matter. If we truly believe in the unalienable right to hold our own convictions, beliefs, and attitudes with impunity no matter who doesn't agree with us, then the bakers are entitled to the same unalienable right.

Unless you think you should be forced to park your truck at the location and be seen carrying a cake into a KKK convention hall and thereby be perceived as condoning that convention, you should be able to understand why a person who does not condone gay marriage should not be forced to participate in that.

To destroy these people purely because you don't share their beliefs and convictions is pure evil.

But if being gay is a sin then any interaction with gay people is a sin, right? I mean if two gay people or two straight people are living together without being married and you bake them a house warming cake are you sinning?

Or is it only wedding cakes that are a sin?

It's ridiculous.

I can tell you that it doesn't matter what is and what is not sin.

What matters is that each of us who believe in unalienable rights is entitled to define for ourselves what is and what is not sin. What is and is not to be condoned. If we are truly free, we can hold whatever beliefs, convictions, principles, ideals, hopes, dreams, or concepts we hold with impunity, whether anybody else shares them or not.

If it is okay for you to destroy a Christian couple's reputation and livelihood because they do not condone gay marriage, why would it not be okay for them to destroy your reputation and livelihood because you do? Or for any other conviction or belief you hold that they don't share?

We cannot be free if we do not allow others to be as free. To destroy a person's livelihood purely because you disagree with their beliefs or convictions on something is pure evil.

I get a warm feeling in side when I think about destroying Obama's ability to burn my country to the ground. Call me a bigot against socialism, if you will.

To this OP, there is no harm in refusing to buy products from a vendor because the vendor is a bigot. However, there is harm in the vendor violating civil rights of a member of the public.

Your assumption that people owe this bigot a living because the bigot happens to be a christian bigot, is over the top.

 

[paperview]

And for people reading this thread, if any, it appears the debate has moved to whether it was more christian and moral to sell these homos a cake for their wedding and then make them pick up or for them to deliver it to the reception hall long before anyone was due to be there and make an extra $50.

Seriously, this is the banality to which christian theology has sunk. "I'm going to heaven if I bake, take their money and make them pick it up but I go straight to hell (do not pass go...) if I put it in my car and deliver it to them for an extra $50.

Looks like the Temp boy is taking out his anger on you by negging you because you disagree with him.

How Christian of him.

Making fun of my faith? How tolerant of you.

Your faith says you have to neg rep posters who disagree with you?

Geeze. The guy has been here one day, and you welcome him like that?

Today was my first interaction with you, and you neg repped me earlier because I pointed out your hypocrisy after you were so "deeply offended" by a satirical video about traditional marriage.

Is that how your faith works? Use your rep button to insult new people you chat with on message boards?

 

[Immanuel]

It's their own fault. People have the right to refuse to buy from them, which they did, and they are complaining about it?
Get over it. Your business closed its doors because of your backward opinions, and that vile Facebook post didn't help matters.

Businesses also have the right not to sell to whom ever they do not wish to do business with. Get over it.

As for the "Facebook page" I suspect that was not posted by them. I would guess the picture was photoshopped or some other Internet trick. But, no one will convince the haters on this site that everyone is not just like them.

Immie

 

[TemplarKormac]

Did anyone stop the baker from practicing his religion or from speaking his mind?

No.

Yeah.

If you haven't noticed, they were sued, harassed, threatened, accosted and finally they had to move their business to their home.

Your paper friend just now said "make cake, not hate" so why was so much hate directed at that bakery?

I didn't think so.

1. Were they prevented from practicing their religion?

No

2. Were they prevented from exercising their first amendment rights

No.

3. People won't tolerate bigots anymore.

As I said times have changed. Society has changed.

Business must adapt or die.

Your baker didn't adapt so his business died.

1. By shaming them back into their home, they prevented them from perhaps spreading the gospel to unbelievers. Those lesbians knew from the moment they went there that they planned to stir up controversy. Thereby telling the world, Christians are bigots! Seriously? Is it wrong to stand up for your beliefs? If anything they were prevented from standing up for their beliefs.

2. Yep. Free enterprise entails running your business in a way you see fit, with whatever themes and undertones you wish. That is called expression, and when you drop the weight of militant gay rights and activists on top of them to make them conform to societal norms, you have essentially denied them their First Amendment right to free expression.

3. Why must people of faith conform and adapt to service ways and people that they don't agree with? Like I told someone else earlier, if you are gay, you wouldn't approve too much of being forced to marry a straight person of the opposite sex, now would you??

 

[paperview]

And for people reading this thread, if any, it appears the debate has moved to whether it was more christian and moral to sell these homos a cake for their wedding and then make them pick up or for them to deliver it to the reception hall long before anyone was due to be there and make an extra $50.

Seriously, this is the banality to which christian theology has sunk. "I'm going to heaven if I bake, take their money and make them pick it up but I go straight to hell (do not pass go...) if I put it in my car and deliver it to them for an extra $50.

Looks like the Temp boy is taking out his anger on you by negging you because you disagree with him.

How Christian of him.

What's a neg? Does it hurt?

See the red under your join date?

Temp dude here is trying to dig your reputation points even as he scream "Free Speech!" and tells us how Jesusy Christian-like people like him are. Or should be. Or something like that.

 

[Alfalfa]

But if being gay is a sin then any interaction with gay people is a sin, right? I mean if two gay people or two straight people are living together without being married and you bake them a house warming cake are you sinning?

Or is it only wedding cakes that are a sin?

It's ridiculous.

I can tell you that it doesn't matter what is and what is not sin.

What matters is that each of us who believe in unalienable rights is entitled to define for ourselves what is and what is not sin. What is and is not to be condoned. If we are truly free, we can hold whatever beliefs, convictions, principles, ideals, hopes, dreams, or concepts we hold with impunity, whether anybody else shares them or not.

If it is okay for you to destroy a Christian couple's reputation and livelihood because they do not condone gay marriage, why would it not be okay for them to destroy your reputation and livelihood because you do? Or for any other conviction or belief you hold that they don't share?

We cannot be free if we do not allow others to be as free. To destroy a person's livelihood purely because you disagree with their beliefs or convictions on something is pure evil.

I get a warm feeling in side when I think about destroying Obama's ability to burn my country to the ground. Call me a bigot against socialism, if you will.

To this OP, there is no harm in refusing to buy products from a vendor because the vendor is a bigot. However, there is harm in the vendor violating civil rights of a member of the public.

Your assumption that people owe this bigot a living because the bigot happens to be a christian bigot, is over the top.

Bigots are not a protected class.

 

[RKMBrown]

If the vendor was being wronged by these groups, such as by being slandered, then the vendor may sue the groups and recoup his losses.

 

[Katzndogz]

Christian bakers who refused cake order for gay wedding forced to close shop

You have the title of your OP all wrong. These two bakers were interviewed on the news and they stated that rather than to be forced into doing something that they felt was morally wrong, they decided on their own to close the bakery and run it from their home as they had done for years before they rented the building for the bakery. She said they weren't forced into anything. By running the bakery from her home she could be more selective in whom she chose to bake for.

Beauregard Bakery in San Francisco just did the same thing. Without having to go through the controversy step.

 

[waltky]

How `bout dat?...

... I went to school with Christian Baker...

... always wondered what ever happened to the guy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah.

If you haven't noticed, they were sued, harassed, threatened, accosted and finally they had to move their business to their home.

Your paper friend just now said "make cake, not hate" so why was so much hate directed at that bakery?

I didn't think so.

1. Were they prevented from practicing their religion?

No

2. Were they prevented from exercising their first amendment rights

No.

3. People won't tolerate bigots anymore.

As I said times have changed. Society has changed.

Business must adapt or die.

Your baker didn't adapt so his business died.

1. By shaming them back into their home, they prevented them from perhaps spreading the gospel to unbelievers.

No they didn't. they can knock on every door in town and tell people how it's a sin to be gay if they want.

Those lesbians knew from the moment they went there that they planned to stir up controversy. Thereby telling the world, Christians are bigots! Seriously? Is it wrong to stand up for your beliefs? If anything they were prevented from standing up for their beliefs.

From what I've read those gay people were regular customers and the baker never thought it was a sin to bake any other kind of cake for them.

2. Yep. Free enterprise entails running your business in a way you see fit, with whatever themes and undertones you wish. That is called expression, and when you drop the weight of militant gay rights and activists on top of them to make them conform to societal norms, you have essentially denied them their First Amendment right to free expression.

No again. No one is preventing them from baking and expressing themselves. they just refuse to patronize their business. tell me if you stop frequenting a business because they treated you poorly and you dissuaded your friends and family from going there or you put a negative review on Yelp are you violating the first amendment rights of the owners of that business?

Of course not.

3. Why must people of faith conform and adapt to service ways and people that they don't agree with? Like I told someone else earlier, if you are gay, you wouldn't approve too much of being forced to marry a straight person of the opposite sex, now would you??

So baking a cake is tantamount to being forced into a gay marriage?

All he was asked to do was bake a cake. It's not any more complicated than that.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Looks like the Temp boy is taking out his anger on you by negging you because you disagree with him.

How Christian of him.

Making fun of my faith? How tolerant of you.

Your faith says you have to neg rep posters who disagree with you?

Geeze. The guy has been here one day, and you welcome him like that?

Today was my first interaction with you, and you neg repped me earlier because I pointed out you hypocrisy after you we so "deeply offended" by a satirical video about traditional marriage.

Is that how your faith works? Use your rep button to insult new people you chat with on message boards?

Read my sig. It is an open warning to anyone. If you don't like it, that's not my problem. What are you, scared?

Your rank insensitivity toward people of my faith is what got you negged. You folks know there are people of faith on this board who would most likely be offended by it. This isn't some gay bar where you can tell these kinds of jokes in secret, other people see it. Say what you want, but if you are going to purposefully provoke people for their beliefs, and then post videos about it, you will get negged each and every time I'm allowed to. I will not let that stand. Got it? It is purely uncalled for what you do, and what the gay community did to these bakers.

Keep your tolerance liberal. You have none to spare. Save your equality, because nobody but your own will be on equal footing with you.

 

[Foxfyre]

But if being gay is a sin then any interaction with gay people is a sin, right? I mean if two gay people or two straight people are living together without being married and you bake them a house warming cake are you sinning?

Or is it only wedding cakes that are a sin?

It's ridiculous.

I can tell you that it doesn't matter what is and what is not sin.

What matters is that each of us who believe in unalienable rights is entitled to define for ourselves what is and what is not sin. What is and is not to be condoned. If we are truly free, we can hold whatever beliefs, convictions, principles, ideals, hopes, dreams, or concepts we hold with impunity, whether anybody else shares them or not.

If it is okay for you to destroy a Christian couple's reputation and livelihood because they do not condone gay marriage, why would it not be okay for them to destroy your reputation and livelihood because you do? Or for any other conviction or belief you hold that they don't share?

We cannot be free if we do not allow others to be as free. To destroy a person's livelihood purely because you disagree with their beliefs or convictions on something is pure evil.

I see it as no different if they had said they won't serve Black people.

And I agree they had the right to refuse but now they have to live with the consequences of that decision.

And the consequences for bigotry in today's society are severe.

Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.

And if you think it is okay to destroy somebody's livelihood for what YOU define as bigotry, then it is okay if they destroy your livelihood for what THEY define as bigotry?

If holding unpopular beliefs is justification for having one's business destroyed due to the bigotry of others, then we have no freedom left in America. Because to condemn and intentionally destroy people for what they believe is the worst form of bigotry.

And freedom loving people will condemn it every time because it is pure evil.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is no civil right to the labor of another person. That's a reinvention of slavery. The bakery advertised wedding cakes. By making an offer for service to the public, under public accommodation laws (not civil rights laws) the bakery was obligated to fulfill the offer.

 

[paperview]

...do you really sincerely believe that this couple would violate their conscience by rendering aid to something they deemed as sinful?

Seems you missed this:

Sweet Cakes By Melissa, Oregon Bakery That Refused Lesbian Couple, Pranked By Undercover Reporter

Quote:
"I was wondering if you could do two little cakes. My friend is a researcher at OHSU and she just got a grant for cloning human stem cells, so I thought I’d get her two identical cakes—basically, two little clone cakes. How much would they cost?" the covert reporter asked an employee at Sweet Cakes By Melissa in Gresham, Ore.

“Ha. All right. When are you looking to do it? It’ll be $25.99 each, so about $50 to start," a bakery employee told the reporter, according to The Willamette Week.

In addition to agreeing to make a cake for a "pagan solstice party" (the reporter requested a pentagram of icing on the cake), Sweet Cakes also agreed to make custom cakes for a divorce party and a party for a woman who'd had multiple babies out of wedlock, the paper notes.

Their "Christian" beliefs violatin' seems to be cafeteria style.

Given that you got that from none other than the Huffington Post, it immediately discredits your argument. Did you have any proof to substantiate this claim? Of course not.

Cake Wars: Asking Shops Who Denied Gays Cakes What Cakes They'll Make

Didn't even bother to see it was from a story from the LOCAL Portland paper, did you?

lol. You cite the Moonie Times as Gospel, but the local newspaper reporter in Portland, naw...gotta be lyin'.

 

[Asclepias]

1. By shaming them back into their home, they prevented them from perhaps spreading the gospel to unbelievers. Those lesbians knew from the moment they went there that they planned to stir up controversy. Thereby telling the world, Christians are bigots! Seriously? Is it wrong to stand up for your beliefs? If anything they were prevented from standing up for their beliefs.

2. Yep. Free enterprise entails running your business in a way you see fit, with whatever themes and undertones you wish. That is called expression, and when you drop the weight of militant gay rights and activists on top of them to make them conform to societal norms, you have essentially denied them their First Amendment right to free expression.

3. Why must people of faith conform and adapt to service ways and people that they don't agree with? Like I told someone else earlier, if you are gay, you wouldn't approve too much of being forced to marry a straight person of the opposite sex, now would you??

They can still preach their hate from their home. No one is stopping them. I hope the lesbians did do it on purpose. Root out the cancer clusters and expose them. There are plenty of Christians that are really Christians. One of the things the bible says is not to judge others. If you disagree with what someone does in their bedroom stay out of it and then your problem is solved.

If you see fit to discriminate with your business then people are free to sabotage your business. It works both ways. If they took the couples money then they should have given them the same service they would give anyone else.

People of faith must conform to their society if they wish to profit off that society. Getting married is a personal choice. Running a business for public consumption renders you open to public decisions. If you want to make a statement put up signs in your business that say Gay people are not welcome. We will all laugh as we watch you go out of business.

 

[Katzndogz]

I can tell you that it doesn't matter what is and what is not sin.

What matters is that each of us who believe in unalienable rights is entitled to define for ourselves what is and what is not sin. What is and is not to be condoned. If we are truly free, we can hold whatever beliefs, convictions, principles, ideals, hopes, dreams, or concepts we hold with impunity, whether anybody else shares them or not.

If it is okay for you to destroy a Christian couple's reputation and livelihood because they do not condone gay marriage, why would it not be okay for them to destroy your reputation and livelihood because you do? Or for any other conviction or belief you hold that they don't share?

We cannot be free if we do not allow others to be as free. To destroy a person's livelihood purely because you disagree with their beliefs or convictions on something is pure evil.

I see it as no different if they had said they won't serve Black people.

And I agree they had the right to refuse but now they have to live with the consequences of that decision.

And the consequences for bigotry in today's society are severe.

Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.

And if you think it is okay to destroy somebody's livelihood for what YOU define as bigotry, then it is okay if they destroy your livelihood for what THEY define as bigotry?

If holding unpopular beliefs is justification for having one's business destroyed due to the bigotry of others, then we have no freedom left in America. Because to condemn and intentionally destroy people for what they believe is the worst form of bigotry.

And freedom loving people will condemn it every time because it is pure evil.

Justifying what was done to this couple would also justify Christians boycotting and picketing any gay owned business they choose.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Seems you missed this:

Sweet Cakes By Melissa, Oregon Bakery That Refused Lesbian Couple, Pranked By Undercover Reporter



Their "Christian" beliefs violatin' seems to be cafeteria style.

Given that you got that from none other than the Huffington Post, it immediately discredits your argument. Did you have any proof to substantiate this claim? Of course not.

Cake Wars: Asking Shops Who Denied Gays Cakes What Cakes They'll Make

Didn't even bother to see it was from a story from the LOCAL Portland paper, did you?

lol. You cite the Moonie Times as Gospel, but the local newspaper reporter in Portland, naw...gotta be lyin'.

But you use Huffington Post as a source? And you lecture me about mine? I despise intellectual dishonesty. Yours is of the worst kind. Where on their site do they volunteer to do parties for pagan rituals and satanic ceremonies?

 

[paperview]

Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.
...

Where the hell do you guys keep coming up with this? They HAD to deliver?

You guys are flying off your pants now making shit up. Stop it.

The owner didn't even let them get that far. You have NO WAY to know if they even intended to pick it up or not.

The minute they told them it was for a same sex wedding, the bakers said they wouldn't do it, and the "abominations" spewed forth.

 

[RKMBrown]

]
Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.

Wow fox, cause gay weddings are the same as black voodoo ceremonies and black satanic festivals.

I know your are from that "prior" generation and all. News flash the world has moved beyond the ignorant belief that blacks are all devil worshipers who practice voodoo and gays all want to rape little boys.