Christian bakers who refused to make cake for homosexual "wedding" break gag order

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is why its so easy for the rw establ to lead around their supporters by the nose while they're simultaneously robbing them blind

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

PA laws happened because for a looong, long, loooong time, some assjacks ****ed it up for a lot of people by discriminating the hell out of certain classes of folks.

 

[Preacher]

Odium is all for religious freedoms so long as they are not Jewish or Muslims. Pardon me if I find you concerns to be disingenuous bullshit.

I am for religious freedom period. I have said that many times. Not my problem if you ignore that.

Your posts in these threads tell a different story:
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

100,000 Christians are killed annually

Teen told he can't join the marines because of his Confederate Flag tatoo

The only person you are fooling is yourself.

Selective post grabbing...I was asked this same question a few days ago and I said the same thing I am saying now. All religions no matter how stupid or antiquated etc deserve to be kept safe under the first amendment. Right up until the point we destroy ALL of them.

 

[paperview]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

They know their marks well.

Indeed.

Also, another lie in the OP story is the Kleins saying they "never had their day in court" -- well there are big thick stacks of pages of the Klein's testimony and numerous hearings with evidence they had their opportunity to be heard by numerous judges -- and they lost. Over and over.

More lies from the Kleins. It's pretty much their gig.

 

[paperview]

This is why its so easy for the rw establ to lead around their supporters by the nose while they're simultaneously robbing them blind

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

PA laws happened because for a looong, long, loooong time, some assjacks ****ed it up for a lot of people by discriminating the hell out of certain classes of folks.

What confuses you?

 

[Preacher]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

Stop lying you little shit. There IS a gag order and has been for a while.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is why its so easy for the rw establ to lead around their supporters by the nose while they're simultaneously robbing them blind

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause – their intent and function have nothing whatsoever to do with 'forcing' anyone to do anything.

Public accommodations laws are regulatory measures designed to protect the integrity of the local market, and all other interrelated markets; allowing businesses to discriminate based on race, religion, or sexual orientation can clearly be disruptive to local markets, and are prohibited accordingly.

Businesses are subject to all manner of lawful, appropriate regulatory policies, where public accommodations laws are no different and just as warranted.

Last, public accommodations laws in no way 'violate' the private property rights of business owners, nor do they 'interfere' with anyone's religious liberty, as religious beliefs can in no way be used to 'justify' ignoring an otherwise just and proper law, such as public accommodations laws.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

Stop lying you little shit. There IS a gag order and has been for a while.

The moron probably got that BS from the leftist rag Slate

Sorry, Slate: Oregon Did ‘Gag’ Those Christian Bakers

 

[paperview]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

Stop lying you little shit. There IS a gag order and has been for a while.

They did not have a "gag order."

They were required to follow ORS 659A.409. That says a place of public accommodation in OR cannot publish or circulate an intent to violate the law.

They were doing that. It had nothing to do with talking about the case itself.

It wasn't a gag order. It was a "follow the law" order.

They do not have a place of Public Accommodation any longer, so they can scream their heads off about how much they hate - and don't want to do business with The Gheys.

OP and accompanying story is a pile of bullshit.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is why its so easy for the rw establ to lead around their supporters by the nose while they're simultaneously robbing them blind

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

PA laws happened because for a looong, long, loooong time, some assjacks ****ed it up for a lot of people by discriminating the hell out of certain classes of folks.

What confuses you?

Your response to my comments. I was referring to it being wrong to have laws forcing people to do something against their personal choice, you commented that those laws were brought in because....certain classes of people had been discriminated against for a long time.

So how does this add up to laws brought in FORCING people to do something against their personal choice?

Edited for spelling error

 

[AmericanFirst1]

This is why its so easy for the rw establ to lead around their supporters by the nose while they're simultaneously robbing them blind

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

Public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, as authorized by the Commerce Clause – their intent and function have nothing whatsoever to do with 'forcing' anyone to do anything.

Public accommodations laws are regulatory measures designed to protect the integrity of the local market, and all other interrelated markets; allowing businesses to discriminate based on race, religion, or sexual orientation can clearly be disruptive to local markets, and are prohibited accordingly.

Businesses are subject to all manner of lawful, appropriate regulatory policies, where public accommodations laws are no different and just as warranted.

Last, public accommodations laws in no way 'violate' the private property rights of business owners, nor do they 'interfere' with anyone's religious liberty, as religious beliefs can in no way be used to 'justify' ignoring an otherwise just and proper law, such as public accommodations laws.

Says the jailhouse wanta be lawyer. Idiot.

 

[Dot Com]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

^ that

 

[Dot Com]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

Stop lying you little shit. There IS a gag order and has been for a while.

link?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

More ignorance and stupidity from the right.

The issue has nothing to do with 'liberal judges,' the notion is ridiculous nonsense.

There are no First Amendment 'violations' – neither with regard to free speech nor religious liberty, nor have any rights been 'lost.'

And this also fails as a red herring fallacy, as the president has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

More ignorant and stupidity from the right.

The issue has nothing to do with 'liberal judges,' the notion is ridiculous nonsense.

There are no First Amendment 'violations' – neither with regard to free speech nor religious liberty, nor have any rights been 'lost.'

And this also fails as a red herring fallacy, as the president has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue.

You don't decide what falls under religious freedom and stop using red herring, it's obvious you don't even know what it is

 

[defcon4]

More ignorant and stupidity from the right.

The issue has nothing to do with 'liberal judges,' the notion is ridiculous nonsense.

There are no First Amendment 'violations' – neither with regard to free speech nor religious liberty, nor have any rights been 'lost.'

And this also fails as a red herring fallacy, as the president has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue.

^^^^^^Fails as composition fallacy

 

[paperview]

Liberal judges not only violated the "religious freedom" part of the 1st Amendment but they also violated the "free speech" statute by ordering American citizens not to talk about the case. How many other parts of the Bill of Rights will we lose while the lame duck is in office?

Baking a cake for a gay wedding does not violate anybody's religious beliefs.

The gag order in this case is wrong, however. They have a right to talk about what they are going through and make the people aware of what the government is doing.

No "gag order."

They can talk to their hearts delight. It's a phony line the Kleins are doing as part of their martyr routine to scam more money from the rubes.

Stop lying you little shit. There IS a gag order and has been for a while.

The moron probably got that BS from the leftist rag Slate

Sorry, Slate: Oregon Did ‘Gag’ Those Christian Bakers

No slugnut, who links the idiot rotund man who opined in the batshit RW Heritage Foundation.

Anybody who can read the law knows it wasn't a gag order about speaking about the case -- and they (now pay attention, fleabrain) -- they NO LONGER HAVE A PLACE OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION.

The law in their state against advertising you are going to discriminate in PA's is no longer applicable to them.

 

[Preacher]

Kleins had gag order placed on them - Google Search

Google is your friend.

 

[paperview]

This is a perfect example a libtard stupidity. Libs are retarded commie turds.

The issue is choice and the attack on choice. If someone doesn't want to bake a cake, I think it's very dangerous road to travel where LAWS issued to FORCE someone to do something against their choice.

This isn't just regarding cakes, this is regarding anything, to FORCE people against their wishes is an attack on personal choice.

PA laws happened because for a looong, long, loooong time, some assjacks ****ed it up for a lot of people by discriminating the hell out of certain classes of folks.

What confuses you?

Your response to my comments. I was referring to it being wrong to have laws forcing people to do something against their personal choice, you commented that those laws were brought in because....certain classes of people had been discriminated against for a long time.

So how does this add up to laws brought in FORCING people to do something against their personal choice?

Edited for spelling error

Might want to go back to one of the first PA laws challenged in federal court.

Heart of Atlanta Hotel v US. Look it up. Another one is Piggie Park. Guy ran a chain of BBQ restaurants. Guy there said it was against his religious beliefs for the races to mix and didn't allow blacks and whites to eat together at his restaurants. Guess what he was forced to do?

Since them, a shitton of PA laws have been upheld. Don't want to have to serve people who fall in protected classes, don't operate a public accommodation.

 

[Silhouette]

if they're only baking cakes for thumpers then they never shoulda' moved their *cough* "business" out of the church basement.

Newsflash "thumpers" aren't the only men and women marrying. Their refusal to aid and abet gay marriage is a mandate from Jude 1 of the New Testament. Because men and women of all faiths or none marrying do not defy Jude 1. Only gays do.

 

[Silhouette]

Might want to go back to one of the first PA laws challenged in federal court.

Heart of Atlanta Hotel v US. Look it up. Another one is Piggie Park. Guy ran a chain of BBQ restaurants. Guy there said it was against his religious beliefs for the races to mix and didn't allow blacks and whites to eat together at his restaurants. Guess what he was forced to do?

Since them, a shitton of PA laws have been upheld. Don't want to have to serve people who fall in protected classes, don't operate a public accommodation.

All PA laws cite the 14th Amendment. Race is a guaranteed protection. Sexual behaviors aren't. So, there's your legal snag on PA vs 1st Amendment religious protections. People of religion and faith..and even seculars reserve the right to refuse to participate in other behaviors they don't like.