Oregon Bakers: You get to pay 135,000 for being radical religious morons, Judge so orders!

[Aba Incieni]

Nazi law said Jews and others...negroes, for instance...were something less than human. Under people, they called them.

Of course we must all follow laws.

So...you want to compare our laws...passed by legislatures, subject to judicial review, capable of being repealed....to NAZI edicts? You're a trumpanzee, aren't you?

You were discussing the Nazis and their laws. And the need to follow laws.

I was replying to YOUR discussion of NAZIS and their laws. Please remember your own posts. TIA.

And I replied to yours. Try to keep up K.

Ironic coming from someone who doesn't even know the particulars of the case.

You sure don't. Good stuff.

 

[WorldWatcher]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

 

[Pop23]

Open question to those on the thread who arguing against the judge's ruling: Are you opposed to protected classes and PA laws in general? Or are you just opposed to adding sexual orientation to the list of protected classes?

I am against the fact that the petty assholes sued them over a cake. Targeted them then sued them.

But they got their itty bitty sensibilities hurted

 

[Aba Incieni]

Don't answer the very pertinent and direct question. This is why you lose.

Sorry. I don't know how to respond to a question about gay gravel. I don't think any sane person would.

Try responding to the question about being forced to produce something that you don't.

"gay gravel".....

Did you really believe this was about cakes? lol

No. It was about hateful religious bible thumpers.

State control. Insist upon it.

 

[dblack]

You're talking in circles, because you edited my post.

Should he be forced to sell something he doesn't want to, ie, do protective rights apply to products?

The bakers aren't forced to supply Wedding Cakes if they don't want to. They are free not to offer Wedding Cakes as part of their business model.


>>>>

This assumes we give up our basic individual rights in exchange for the "privilege" of being allowed to trade with others. I don't accept that. And it's really the core issue here.

Yes...welcome to the business world.

Welcome to corporatism.

 

[BULLDOG]

Sorry. I don't know how to respond to a question about gay gravel. I don't think any sane person would.

Try responding to the question about being forced to produce something that you don't.

"gay gravel".....

Did you really believe this was about cakes? lol

No. It was about hateful religious bible thumpers.

All artists are religious bible thumping haters?

Good to know.

You're trying to use a really dumb excuse.

 

[Aba Incieni]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

Not the ones the clients desired. Not that it mattered, they will sue to force them to be.

 

[Aba Incieni]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

BTW, they provide gay wedding cakes to no one. Not even you.

 

[dblack]

not sure why people cheer when the Constitution is ignored.

leftist, hating America since fdr

Did you feel that way when an Oregon dentist was fined TWICE as much under the same PA law for discriminating against a christian woman based on her religion? That's the precedent for this case, you know.

Yep. And it was bad precedent. Government should be protecting equal rights, not granting special privilege.

And how are you actively working to repeal the PA laws in your state?

This again? I'm not going to tell you personal details of my life - but I do work, actively, to get this kind of shit repealed. Are you suggesting I don't? Do you have point? At all?

Sure you are....petitions? lobby groups? whining on the Internet? which one is the MOST likely?

Fuck you, trolling piece of shit. You don't have the brains to discuss issues logically, so you resort to insinuation and accusation. Suck a tail pipe.

 

[Pop23]

Everyone...homos, heteros, and other...had equal access to all goods offered. They don't make gay wedding cakes for heteros, either.

There is no difference in the production of a Wedding Cake for same-sex or different-sex couples. The ingredients and process are the same - the only difference is the customers.

That's like saying Piggie Park BBQ make white BBQ and black BBQ and their is a difference in the BBQ. (BTW - Piggie Park Enterprises lost their Public Accommodation case when they claimed it was against their religion to service black people.)

>>>>

Of course they were offered the cake. The artist would not supply the art. His blank canvas was simply artistic license.

Nope. You simply are lying or don't know the case.

Oh, now artistic license is ignored? Got it, now back to interior decorating with ya.

Any reference to artistic talent was ignored until the hateful homophobes started to desperately try to come up with an excuse fort their behavior.

Ohhhhhh, so NOW artist are not free to produce art as they wish. Just as you wish.

Say hi to Hitler next time you bang him.

K?

 

[BULLDOG]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

BTW, they provide gay wedding cakes to no one. Not even you.

They provide nothing to anyone any more. That happens when you don't follow the law.

 

[Pop23]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

BTW, they provide gay wedding cakes to no one. Not even you.

Not even to heterosexuals, because his artistic sense just doesn’t do that, no matter your sexuality.

 

[Aba Incieni]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

BTW, they provide gay wedding cakes to no one. Not even you.

They provide nothing to anyone any more. That happens when you don't follow the law.

They are looking at a new bakery with their court winnings.

 

[BULLDOG]

Did you feel that way when an Oregon dentist was fined TWICE as much under the same PA law for discriminating against a christian woman based on her religion? That's the precedent for this case, you know.

Yep. And it was bad precedent. Government should be protecting equal rights, not granting special privilege.

And how are you actively working to repeal the PA laws in your state?

This again? I'm not going to tell you personal details of my life - but I do work, actively, to get this kind of shit repealed. Are you suggesting I don't? Do you have point? At all?

Sure you are....petitions? lobby groups? whining on the Internet? which one is the MOST likely?

Fuck you, trolling piece of shit. You don't have the brains to discuss issues logically, so you resort to insinuation and accusation. Suck a tail pipe.

Was that response based on your Christian beliefs?

 

[dblack]

Yep. And it was bad precedent. Government should be protecting equal rights, not granting special privilege.

And how are you actively working to repeal the PA laws in your state?

This again? I'm not going to tell you personal details of my life - but I do work, actively, to get this kind of shit repealed. Are you suggesting I don't? Do you have point? At all?

Sure you are....petitions? lobby groups? whining on the Internet? which one is the MOST likely?

Fuck you, trolling piece of shit. You don't have the brains to discuss issues logically, so you resort to insinuation and accusation. Suck a tail pipe.

Was that response based on your Christian beliefs?

Nope. I'm not a Christian. It was based on bode's continually calling me a liar. It gets tiresome.

 

[Leo123]

I think we need to take a long look at our judicial branch. This is just one of many decisions handed down recently that really stink.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Refused to CREATE a homosexual themed wedding cake. The couple was free to buy a stock cake from the case.

This is a frontal assault on the first amendment.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans have died fighting to protect freedom, will we be the generation that let's black robed thugs end the experiment in liberty?

Most Wedding Cakes are custom products.

This isn't a freedom issue. This is a consumer dispute, and most of these should be resolved in favor of- wait for it - the consumer.

This is a frontal assault on the 1st Amendment. The lesbian activists targeted Sweet Cakes because the proprietors were Christian for the purpose of creating a case to be used to end the 1st Amendment. If Hillary had been elected and a radical left SCOTUS appointee were on the bench, this would end freedom of religion once and for all, as was planned. However, you have 5 to 4 who support the United States Constitution, so when this get to the court, you will lose and the 1st Amendment will be upheld.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not the ones the clients desired. Not that it mattered, they will sue to force them to be.

I'm not understanding what you are trying to say.

The bakers sold wedding cakes, from the statement of facts their was never any discussion about design because as soon as Aaron Klien was introduced to the Mother and one of the brides and was told the wedding cake was going to be for two brides he refused service.

There was never any discussion of design.


>>>>

 

[Aba Incieni]

Not the ones the clients desired. Not that it mattered, they will sue to force them to be.

I'm not understanding what you are trying to say.

The bakers sold wedding cakes, from the statement of facts their was never any discussion about design because as soon as Aaron Klien was introduced to the Mother and one of the brides and was told the wedding cake was going to be for two brides he refused service.

There was never any discussion of design.


>>>>

Not according to the quote from the baker you edited out of my earlier post.

He said he serves gay people. He does not serve gay cakes. Essentially you're arguing gays and their cakes own extralegal rights.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He said he serves gay customers. That is the extent of his requirement by law.

False.

The law is provided below. It does not say as long as we sell one product to a customer, we can refuse another other products we provide as part of our normal business. The laws specifically says "full and equal" pertaining to providing goods and services, not a "subset" of goods and services.

ORS 659A.403 - Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.​

He does not have to serve them anything not on the menu.

Wedding Cakes were on the "menu".


>>>>

BTW, they provide gay wedding cakes to no one. Not even you.

They provide nothing to anyone any more. That happens when you don't follow the law.

What duty do Americans have to follow blatantly unconstitutional laws?

An assault on freedom of religion is an assault on liberty and the Constitution. However, you Maoists are destined to lose. You never calculated a Hillary loss so the assumption was another Marxist like Kagan on the court to put an end to Civil Rights.