Bakery Faces Boycott for Refusing to Make Gay Wedding Cake

[ChunkyMonkey]

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/bakery-faces-boycott-for-refusing-to-make-gay-wedding-cake.html


Bakery Faces Boycott for Refusing to Make Gay Wedding Cake
Jul 30, 2012

The owner of a Colorado bakery has been accused of violating the civil rights of a gay couple after he refused to bake their wedding cake — and now gay rights advocates are calling for a boycott.

FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK — FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE.
Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cake Shop in Lakewood, Colo., said he has received more than 1,000 angry messages — critics upset because he would not compromise his personal beliefs and bake a cake for Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig.

The couple, set to be married in Massachusetts in September, told television station KDVR they wanted a rainbow-layered cake with teal and red frosting. They said the owner immediately informed the men that he does not create cakes for gay weddings.

“It was the most awkward, surreal, very brief encounter,” Mullins, 28, told Denver Westward. ”We got up to leave, and to be totally honest, I said, ‘F**k you and your homophobic cake shop.’ And I may or may not have flipped him off.”

But Phillips defended his decision in an interview with television station KCNC in Denver.

“If gays come in and want to order birthday cakes or any cakes for any occasion, graduations, or whatever, I have no prejudice against that whatsoever,” Phillips told the television station. “It’s just the wedding cake, not the people, not their lifestyle.”

Phillips said he’s not budging one inch and will not compromise his beliefs — even if it means losing his business.

“We would close down that bakery before we closed our beliefs, so that may be what it comes to … we’ll see,” Phillips said.

Boycott efforts have already been started — with hundreds joining a Facebook page protesting the bakery. An online petition has already generated several thousand signatures.

“We need to send a message to them that in this day and age, bigotry cannot and will not be tolerated,” the petition organizer wrote online. “I’m not sure how the cakes taste, but I know how bigotry and hate tastes and it is disgusting.”

The controversy comes amid national outrage after the president of Chick-fil-A announced that he was “guilty as charged” when it comes to support traditional marriage.

http://imageplay.net/img/tya22277685/eating_popcorn_animated.gif

[00tec]

I want cake now....

I should call up and have him make me some tres leches.

[USMC88-93]

I think I'll go buy a cake.

[Sharpienads]

What do gay people have against straight bakery owners? What a bunch of bigots.

This whole topic drives me crazy. People have different beliefs. Sounds like the gay couple is a real class act. Maybe instead of bitching, they should open a bakery that caters to gay weddings.

[00tec]

This guy is getting hammered on the reviews on google. People even making up shit to make him look bad. I'm flagging all of 'em,...

[ChunkyMonkey]

This guy is getting hammered on the reviews on google. People even making up shit to make him look bad. I'm flagging all of 'em,...

Flag it and copy the article link. Yelp is very strict on this kind of stuff.

[Mazin]

Dude stand up for his beliefs, He has my business.

[SideShow Bob]

Don't most all private businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone ?
Unless he has a government contract, City to Federal, he can tell anyone to go pound sand...............

[Scanker19]

Don't most all private businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone ?
Unless he has a government contract, City to Federal, he can tell anyone to go pound sand...............

Unless someone disagrees with it. Same thing would have happened if this was a black, christian, muslim, woman, mexican, white, jewish, asain, irish, german, white-african etc.... It's just not as common.

Gay's the new Black.

[Sharpienads]

Gay's the new Black.

If I was black that would probably offend me.

[Scanker19]

If I was black that would probably offend me.

Just saying there was a time in this country when it was "okay" to not serve black people. Now Gays are the "in thing".

[Rucker61]

Don't most all private businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone ?
Unless he has a government contract, City to Federal, he can tell anyone to go pound sand...............

And anyone can organize a boycott. Free country, innit? I've seen folks say here that they'd boycott an anti-2nd amendment business. What's the difference?

[00tec]

And anyone can organize a boycott. Free country, innit? I've seen folks say here that they'd boycott an anti-2nd amendment business. What's the difference?

If you read comments about it online, many are saying what he did was illegal.
I don't care if they boycott, and the owner has made it clear he doesn't.

[speedysst]

Seems to me that more and more businesses and people are refusing to be bullied by the gays. First Chik fil a then this guy. By the way, what makes tres leches cake better?

[Half Live]

Where is this place, I want some cake.

[Zundfolge]

Gay's the new Black.
No, actually Gay is the new White Power.

[hollohas]

I smell a setup. Why would they buy a cake in Lakewood for a wedding in Mass?

[00tec]

Seems to me that more and more businesses and people are refusing to be bullied by the gays. First Chik fil a then this guy. By the way, what makes tres leches cake better?

It's just one of those things you have to try. Really moist and awesome.

[Ridge]

Don't most all private businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone ?
Unless he has a government contract, City to Federal, he can tell anyone to go pound sand...............

Yep, and people have the right to spend their money elsewhere.

[Ridge]

By the way, what makes tres leches cake better?

Nothing. It's sopping wet with milk.

[sniper7]

I smell a setup. Why would they buy a cake in Lakewood for a wedding in Mass?

I thought the exact same thing...unless they are just having a reception here after they get back or something ghey like that.

[Rucker61]

If you read comments about it online, many are saying what he did was illegal.



Some folks are just idiots, like the people who think that the right to free speech applies in all situations.



I don't care if they boycott, and the owner has made it clear he doesn't.

Why should he? He doesn't want to serve their kind. I also don't care one way or the other. I wasn't invited to the wedding, so I wouldn't get any cake anywahy.

[SideShow Bob]

It's just one of those things you have to try. Really moist and awesome.

He said moist......[LOL][LOL]

[hollohas]

I thought the exact same thing...unless they are just having a reception here after they get back or something ghey like that.

[ROFL2]

I suppose that's possible.

My kid's birthday is in two weeks. This bakery is nearby...maybe I'll get a cake there just to offset some of the haters.

[00tec]

He said moist......[LOL][LOL]

Well, dry definitely isn't fun.

[clublights]

Just saw this on Fox31 news....

The bakery says that business has doubled since this all came out.




I could care less if gays get married or not

I could care less if a business declines to support said gay marriages.

Tho one of my fav jokes is " Gay have every right to be miserable in a marriage like straight people are."

[sniper7]

Just saw this on Fox31 news....

The bakery says that business has doubled since this all came out.




I could care less if gays get married or not

I could care less if a business declines to support said gay marriages.

Tho one of my fav jokes is " Gay have every right to be miserable in a marriage like straight people are."

Awesome! Looks like the boycott thing is working out great for them[ROFL1]

[CO Hugh]

You get the worst of the world which is two naggy women marrying each other. Instead of manning up and finding the gay bakery they have to issue a press release, like a couple of hos fighting in the street.

The whole country has turned into a cesspool. It is disgusting that now you have to explain to kids about two men in a family in addition to the birds and the bees. Where is Maybury?

[Sharpienads]

Just saying there was a time in this country when it was "okay" to not serve black people. Now Gays are the "in thing".

He said he has no problem making a cake for somebody who's gay, he just won't make one for a gay wedding. IMHO, what gays "suffer" is nothing in comparison to what blacks suffered.


No, actually Gay is the new White Power.

I'd say this is more correct.

[Ah Pook]

They couldn't find a gay friendly cake decorator? I shouldn't be that hard. Personally, I'd rather support a similar minded business.

[Sharpienads]

The facebook page calling for a boycott says that the owner has received death threats. Don't know if it's true or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[clublights]

The facebook page calling for a boycott says that the owner has received death threats. Don't know if it's true or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Wouldn't that technically be a hate crime?

He's doing it on his religious beliefs...

[newracer]

If you read comments about it online, many are saying what he did was illegal.


Some folks are just idiots, like the people who think that the right to free speech applies in all situations.


It actually is illegal.


24-34-601. Discrimination in places of public accommodation - definition

(1) As used in this part 6, "place of public accommodation" means any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to any business offering wholesale or retail sales to the public; any place to eat, drink, sleep, or rest, or any combination thereof; any sporting or recreational area and facility; any public transportation facility; a barber shop, bathhouse, swimming pool, bath, steam or massage parlor, gymnasium, or other establishment conducted to serve the health, appearance, or physical condition of a person; a campsite or trailer camp; a dispensary, clinic, hospital, convalescent home, or other institution for the sick, ailing, aged, or infirm; a mortuary, undertaking parlor, or cemetery; an educational institution; or any public building, park, arena, theater, hall, auditorium, museum, library, exhibit, or public facility of any kind whether indoor or outdoor. "Place of public accommodation" shall not include a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place that is principally used for religious purposes.

(2) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation or, directly or indirectly, to publish, circulate, issue, display, post, or mail any written, electronic, or printed communication, notice, or advertisement that indicates that the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from, or denied an individual or that an individual's patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.

(2.5) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for any person to discriminate against any individual or group because such person or group has opposed any practice made a discriminatory practice by this part 6 or because such person or group has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing conducted pursuant to this part 6.

(3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, it is not a discriminatory practice for a person to restrict admission to a place of public accommodation to individuals of one sex if such restriction has a bona fide relationship to the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of such place of public accommodation.

[rondog]

Is a "gay cake" made with fudge?

And wasn't there a bakery here that made cakes shaped like all of the assorted interesting body parts? Coulda got a big cake that looked like a couple of crossed swords, I guess.....

[Rucker61]

It actually is illegal.

What legal excerpt is that from?

[Big Wall]

Looking at his web site, he has several examples of religious themed cakes shown. I applaud him for standing by his beliefs.

[newracer]

What legal excerpt is that from?

Colorado Revised Statute 24-34-601

[sniper7]

It actually is illegal.

so what kind of punishment could he be looking at?

[Byte Stryke]

So freedom of religion isn't...

[Dr_Fwd]

Looking at his web site, he has several examples of religious themed cakes shown. I applaud him for standing by his beliefs.

Have a link?

P. S. Never mind, found it.

[onebadfx4]

If I lived closer, I would go buy a cake just cause this guy had the testical fortitude to stand by his beliefs.

[hghclsswhitetrsh]

We got our wedding cakes from them. We also buy a few other various cakes from them through out the year. They will continue to get our business.

[Rucker61]

So freedom of religion isn't...

Curious how you see that this violates the First Amendment.

[Whistler]

Colorado Revised Statute 24-34-601

Newracer you are just quoted to get the Statue and this rant is not directed at you.

I'd like to see this one go to court and maybe we'll get an opportunity to modify a law that purchases "rights" for "protected groups" at the cost of another's innate rights. I can't make a cake out of a box mix but if I did by God I'd sell it or not sell it to whoever I choose.

Their "right" to purchase a widely available product from one particular location that clearly does not want their business is not a right at all and should be afforded no protection that restricts the rights of another to conduct business as they see fit. How is this a bit different than businesses that restrict concealed carry? They have the right, it is their business after all and I have the right to patronize their competition.

I discriminate against thugs, gang-bangers and punks, I won't sell them a damn thing. Folks are free to practice pretty much any deviant or anti-social lifestyle they choose but I don't agree they are all good for our society and I don't have to support them in any fashion despite some touchy-feely-everybody-is-pretty law to contrary. [Rant1]

[armstrong001]

Since when is it a civil right to make someone bake you a cake? Unless it's your wife...

[hghclsswhitetrsh]

Whatever happen to the right to refuse service to anyone?

[newracer]

so what kind of punishment could he be looking at?

This


24-34-602. Penalty and civil liability

(1) Any person who violates section 24-34-601 shall be fined not less than fifty dollars nor more than five hundred dollars for each violation. A person aggrieved by the violation of section 24-34-601 shall bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction in the county where the violation occurred. Upon finding a violation, the court shall order the defendant to pay the fine to the aggrieved party.

(2) For each violation of section 24-34-601, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than ten dollars nor more than three hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(3) A judgment in favor of the party aggrieved or punishment upon an indictment or information shall be a bar to either prosecution, respectively; but the relief provided by this section shall be an alternative to that authorized by section 24-34-306 (9), and a person who seeks redress under this section shall not be permitted to seek relief from the commission.

[newracer]

Whatever happen to the right to refuse service to anyone?

You still can as long as it is not based on disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.

[armstrong001]

You still can as long as it is not based on disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.

I never understood this. If a person doesn't want to serve "your kind", why would you want to give them your business? I would rather know up front what kinds of people a person doesnt want to serve, and make my business decisions accordingly. And if a business owner feels like limiting their potential client base, that's their decision.

[00tec]

Curious how you see that this violates the First Amendment.
If that man's religion says he is to have no part in homo weddings, then the government cannot force him.
Just as the Catholics don't have to provide control as Obamacare says.

He did not refuse service to them based on their sexual orientation, he refused service to a ceremony that dies not exist in his religion.

[DD977GM2]

I posted on YELP that I support his decision to refuse service to anyone as he is the OWNER!!!!!!!!!!!!
I really hate the gay agenda and how they act like fucking sleeze but when someone stands up for their
beliefs, they get shit on and are the devil. [Bang][Rant1][Bang][Rant1][Bang]

[Scanker19]

So everybody else's religion can go F*ck themselves? That's how a lot of people read that. Fredom of Religion (only if it's christianity).

[armstrong001]

So everybody else's religion can go F*ck themselves? That's how a lot of people read that. Fredom of Religion (only if it's christianity).

Huh? He's not keeping them from buying a cake, keeping them from exercising their religious beliefs (not sure which religion mentions wedding cakes as part of the ritual), he just refuses to participate. BFD.

[sneakerd]

Sorry don't have time to read all- but let's sticky this cake shop and make it the Official Cake Shop of COAR! Let's bust his business wide open and make him have to open another shop! I want the address- going there this weekend!!

[Rucker61]

If that man's religion says he is to have no part in homo weddings, then the government cannot force him.
Just as the Catholics don't have to provide control as Obamacare says.

He did not refuse service to them based on their sexual orientation, he refused service to a ceremony that dies not exist in his religion.

Do you think he'd sell a wedding cake to someone that wasn't getting married, who just wanted some cake?

[sniper7]

Well based off that a small fine is no biggie and he will make far more than that in continued and increased business.
all he needs to do is have pre-designed non homosexual wedding cakes that couples can choose from and tell them he does not do customized wedding cakes. That solves everything.

[Great-Kazoo]

I'm out of work but will throw him $50 just because, if need be. Some one come by and pick me up thursday morning. I'll buy you lunch and maybe we'll split a cake.

[armstrong001]

Do you think he'd sell a wedding cake to someone that wasn't getting married, who just wanted some cake?

Since he sells other kinds of cake, one might wonder exactly who would want to buy a wedding cake specifically if they just wanted cake. I suppose that someone could order just a fancy cake, not specifically a wedding cake, and put the two grooms or two brides on top themselves. But the question remains, why bother? Aren't there enough bakeries in town where you could just go somewhere else instead of getting all butt hurt about this particular business?

[armstrong001]

Well based off that a small fine is no biggie and he will make far more than that in continued and increased business.
all he needs to do is have pre-designed non homosexual wedding cakes that couples can choose from and tell them he does not do customized wedding cakes. That solves everything.

Except for the people who want to buy a custom cake. They might choose to do business elsewhere.

[mevshooter]

So everybody else's religion can go F*ck themselves? That's how a lot of people read that. Fredom of Religion (only if it's christianity).

Yeah... you're not going to get much traction with that statement on this forum.

[kanekutter05]

Well my wife needs to buy a cake for a baby shower she's throwing next week...guess we just found where we're going to buy it from.

[Byte Stryke]

What I was trying to say is that the "Freedom of religion"(ie: the Pastry Chef) no longer exists and is being superseded by the couples desire to have him make their wedding cake.


the poor guy could face a year in jail for it...

[TFOGGER]

It actually is illegal.

Simple answer: I didn't refuse them service because they were gay, I refused them service because they were assholes...

[Sharpienads]

Simple answer: I didn't refuse them service because they were gay, I refused them service because they were assholes...

Yep.

[Whistler]

Simple answer: I didn't refuse them service because they were gay, I refused them service because they were assholes...

[ROFL1] Perfect

[Great-Kazoo]

I feel this business was targeted. The same thing happened in denver 10-15 years ago with the ADA. Alleged disabled people would target restaurants saying they did not have good enough access for wheel chairs, restrooms not up to snuff etc. Even though the city signed off on their remodels. What happened? Frivolous lawsuits the business paid rather than drag it out in court. The Rev jackson's rainbow coalition does the same thing only on a larger scale. Just wait the storm front hasn't hit land yet.

[68Charger]

The way I see it, he didn't refuse service based on their sexual orientation, just based on the request (he did say he WOULD make them a cake for birthdays, etc... just not for a gay wedding)

He could even argue that a gay wedding is not legal in Colorado, so he does not want to participate in an event that could be considered illegal.

but I like the "I refused based on them being immature assholes" argument, too. [Coffee]

ETA: the "pair" of customers has the right to call for a boycott, too... I don't deny them that right. The also have the right to go pout and whine about it, too.

[BushMasterBoy]

http://images.weddingcollectibles.com/T/100956-01.jpg


Just stick this on a cupcake...ok maybe a fudge cake [ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3]

[Chad4000]

Dude stand up for his beliefs, He has my business.


You would almost think that "standing up for ones beliefs" would be something that gays admire........

[Ronin13]

I'm out of work but will throw him $50 just because, if need be. Some one come by and pick me up thursday morning. I'll buy you lunch and maybe we'll split a cake.

Count me in... Let's have a COAR-15 cake party, courtesy of this particular shop.

I said it before with the Chick-Fil-A thing, and I'll say it again, stick to your guns, don't let anyone press your beliefs and make you compromise them. I'm so sick of the gay community getting all up in arms just because someone doesn't agree with them. Life is not fair, not everyone believes what you do, GET OVER IT AND MOVE ON... oh but wait, they can't move on. They want everyone to bend to their will and believe that they are just as "good" as the rest of us. They preach this whole mantra that we all must be tolerant of their lifestyle, well some people don't agree with that lifestyle, can you fvcking hypocrites recognize that it's a two-way street? NO. When you're on the side that simply says "this business doesn't support XXXX, I won't support them" it gets pretty freaking stupid to see the other side say "This business doesn't support xxxxx, ban them!" I wish there was a way to fix this world so this bullshit doesn't go on anymore. [Bang]

[buffalobo]

You would almost think that "standing up for ones beliefs" would be something that gays admire........

They do as long as it matches their warped beliefs. [Flower]

[lifeon2]

It is the business owners choice who they want to serve.
It is the couples choice to be upset about it and call for a boycott.

It is hypocritical to say that the couple or business is wrong after all shouldn't we be supporting the businesses that refuse to allow firearms on their property because they are sticking to their beliefs?
If you want to boycott a business then do so if you want to support a cause then do so this is America home of the free right?

[Chad4000]

It is the business owners choice who they want to serve.
It is the couples choice to be upset about it and call for a boycott.

It is hypocritical to say that the couple or business is wrong after all shouldn't we be supporting the businesses that refuse to allow firearms on their property because they are sticking to their beliefs?
If you want to boycott a business then do so if you want to support a cause then do so this is America home of the free right?


I just might say that having to support gay marriage or face the wrath of "open minded, tolerant people" who will destroy your business, is a little different the choosing not to go to the theater with the no firearms signs on it.

ooooorrrrrr, maybe it's time for a 2nd amendment rights parade, where we all wear leather (holsters) and hump eachother in front of kids. ya know,, just to prove that we are tolerant, and open minded, and just want the same rights as everyone else...

[ChunkyMonkey]

All the bakery needs to do is to create an association.. those who wants to order cake from them, must be a member. Both local and federal courts have upheld America Boy's Scout stand on Gay membership because the right of freedom associations.

[rondog]

http://images.weddingcollectibles.com/T/100956-01.jpg


Just stick this on a cupcake...ok maybe a fudge cake [ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3]

Holy fudge cakes, Batman!

[Irving]

Late to thread, but I could have told you that the only thing to come from this would be a doubling of his business for the next month.

[Byte Stryke]

Late to thread, but I could have told you that the only thing to come from this would be a doubling of his business for the next month.


and Possibly a YEAR in jail...



24-34-602. Penalty and civil liability

(1) Any person who violates section 24-34-601 shall be fined not less than fifty dollars nor more than five hundred dollars for each violation. A person aggrieved by the violation of section 24-34-601 shall bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction in the county where the violation occurred. Upon finding a violation, the court shall order the defendant to pay the fine to the aggrieved party.

(2) For each violation of section 24-34-601, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than ten dollars nor more than three hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(3) A judgment in favor of the party aggrieved or punishment upon an indictment or information shall be a bar to either prosecution, respectively; but the relief provided by this section shall be an alternative to that authorized by section 24-34-306 (9), and a person who seeks redress under this section shall not be permitted to seek relief from the commission.

[rxgremlin]

The owner is a nice guy. My wife and I have ordered maybe a dozen cakes from him. They are expensive but good.

By the way, he will not make a Halloween cake either because of his religious beliefs.

[Byte Stryke]

The owner is a nice guy. My wife and I have ordered maybe a dozen cakes from him. They are expensive but good.

By the way, he will not make a Halloween cake either because of his religious beliefs.



awww futher Mucker.... I am SOOOO Suing!!!!




(kidding)



good for him.

[Sharpienads]

The owner is a nice guy. My wife and I have ordered maybe a dozen cakes from him. They are expensive but good.

By the way, he will not make a Halloween cake either because of his religious beliefs.

OMG!!! Why is he racist against children celebrating halloween?!?!

[00tec]

The owner is a nice guy. My wife and I have ordered maybe a dozen cakes from him. They are expensive but good.

By the way, he will not make a Halloween cake either because of his religious beliefs.

Mind sharing what he generally charges for a simple cake? Need to know how much I should budget for.

[Rooskibar03]

Right around the corner from my house. I'm going to head over and order a cake on my way home from Chick Fil A tomorrow.

I'm done with the progressive agenda.

Your Freedom to be you, Includes my freedom to be free from you

[Sharpienads]

Right around the corner from my house. I'm going to head over and order a cake on my way home from Chick Fil A tomorrow.

I'm done with the progressive agenda.

Your Freedom to be you, Includes my freedom to be free from you

Whoa, sounds like somebody else here listens to The Wilkow Majority!

[Rooskibar03]

Whoa, sounds like somebody else here listens to The Wilkow Majority!

You know it. In fact I met him on Saturday night.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/th_IMG_6397.jpg (http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/?action=view&current=IMG_6397.jpg)

[rxgremlin]

Mind sharing what he generally charges for a simple cake? Need to know how much I should budget for.

A two layer cake about 10-12" in diameter is approx $28.

[sniper7]

Except for the people who want to buy a custom cake. They might choose to do business elsewhere.

He said he would do custom cakes for everyone just not gay wedding cakes.
for the wedding cakes he can make an extensive book to order from with no "customizations" such as rainbows or two men or two women on the cake.

[Jer]

I didn't notice, is this a government funded agency that is prohibited from discriminating against protected classes or is it a private business owner who has the right to do business with or not do business with anyone who he feels like for ANY reason or no reason at all?

You're personal beliefs don't matter.

/thread

[Rucker61]

I didn't notice, is this a government funded agency that is prohibited from discriminating against protected classes or is it a private business owner who has the right to do business with or not do business with anyone who he feels like for ANY reason or no reason at all?

Your personal beliefs don't matter.

/thread

The law does, however, and in this case, neither of your examples fit. As posted earlier:

24-34-601. Discrimination in places of public accommodation - definition

(1) As used in this part 6, "place of public accommodation" means any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to any business offering wholesale or retail sales to the public; any place to eat, drink, sleep, or rest, or any combination thereof; any sporting or recreational area and facility; any public transportation facility; a barber shop, bathhouse, swimming pool, bath, steam or massage parlor, gymnasium, or other establishment conducted to serve the health, appearance, or physical condition of a person; a campsite or trailer camp; a dispensary, clinic, hospital, convalescent home, or other institution for the sick, ailing, aged, or infirm; a mortuary, undertaking parlor, or cemetery; an educational institution; or any public building, park, arena, theater, hall, auditorium, museum, library, exhibit, or public facility of any kind whether indoor or outdoor. "Place of public accommodation" shall not include a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place that is principally used for religious purposes.

(2) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation or, directly or indirectly, to publish, circulate, issue, display, post, or mail any written, electronic, or printed communication, notice, or advertisement that indicates that the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from, or denied an individual or that an individual's patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.

(2.5) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for any person to discriminate against any individual or group because such person or group has opposed any practice made a discriminatory practice by this part 6 or because such person or group has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing conducted pursuant to this part 6.

(3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, it is not a discriminatory practice for a person to restrict admission to a place of public accommodation to individuals of one sex if such restriction has a bona fide relationship to the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of such place of public accommodation.

[Byte Stryke]

OMG!!! Why is he racist against children celebrating halloween?!?!

please tell me you are kidding....

my sarcasm meter is borked

[mevshooter]

(2) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation or, directly or indirectly, to publish, circulate, issue, display, post, or mail any written, electronic, or printed communication, notice, or advertisement that indicates that the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from, or denied an individual or that an individual's patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.
.

That big part I highlighted is where I think the argument that it is "illegal" may not be accurate.

Isn't a private business a PRIVATE business? Its not a park, or a court house, or a state owned university, etc.

Similar to a business being able to "ban" firearms on their property, even though it is a right in this state with the proper permits, or OC'ing if allowed.

[Great-Kazoo]

That big part I highlighted is where I think the argument that it is "illegal" may not be accurate.

Isn't a private business a PRIVATE business? Its not a park, or a court house, or a state owned university, etc.

Similar to a business being able to "ban" firearms on their property, even though it is a right in this state with the proper permits, or OC'ing if allowed.


Public Accommodation. Unless he is a diner, restaurant or a place where patrons sit sip coffee, cake and wi-fi he does not fall under that guideline. Probably doesn't offer a public rest room either.
FWIW: i read a story how NY is now going to lock up baby formula in hospitals. Reason being they want every mother to nurse vs formula feed the kid. Not that i am opposed to BF, we did it until she had aged a few months.
It's the constant intrusion the .gov [state & federal] trying to nanny us how best to live. The Chic fil A, and cake place trying to force them to bow to 1 special interest group. Something the left constantly complains the NRA / BIG MONEY lobby is doing.

[Scanker19]

That big part I highlighted is where I think the argument that it is "illegal" may not be accurate.

Isn't a private business a PRIVATE business? Its not a park, or a court house, or a state owned university, etc.

Similar to a business being able to "ban" firearms on their property, even though it is a right in this state with the proper permits, or OC'ing if allowed.

I think the problem he may run into is the part at the beginning where it says A PERSON cannot do this, GOV is not a person. The Government however does issue Business licenses. I still fall to see how this is any different than not serving a different race or religion. Everyone here would be insane with anger if the shoe was on the other foot, but some how the other side is the crybaby when they don't get their way. I'm sure the anti-gun people say the same thing about us when we complain about not being able to CC in certain places.

Just to be clear if the shoe was on the other foot, I'd still be on the side of those that were refused service, be they Christian, Gay, Black, Manbearpig, or Infantry (luckily I can refuse service to Infanty[Flower]).

[Sharpienads]

I'd support ANY business that refused service to the infantry. The rest of the military is ok, just not the infantry [Tooth]

[newracer]

That big part I highlighted is where I think the argument that it is "illegal" may not be accurate.

Isn't a private business a PRIVATE business? Its not a park, or a court house, or a state owned university, etc.

Similar to a business being able to "ban" firearms on their property, even though it is a right in this state with the proper permits, or OC'ing if allowed.

It is right there in the statute


(1) As used in this part 6, "place of public accommodation" means any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to any business offering wholesale or retail sales to the public; any place to eat, drink, sleep, or rest, or any combination thereof; any sporting or recreational area and facility; any public transportation facility; a barber shop, bathhouse, swimming pool, bath, steam or massage parlor, gymnasium, or other establishment conducted to serve the health, appearance, or physical condition of a person; a campsite or trailer camp; a dispensary, clinic, hospital, convalescent home, or other institution for the sick, ailing, aged, or infirm; a mortuary, undertaking parlor, or cemetery; an educational institution; or any public building, park, arena, theater, hall, auditorium, museum, library, exhibit, or public facility of any kind whether indoor or outdoor. "Place of public accommodation" shall not include a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place that is principally used for religious purposes.

[tonantius]

I'd support ANY business that refused service to the infantry. The rest of the military is ok, just not the infantry [Tooth]

Hey! I like the infantry.

[Rucker61]

Hey! I like the infantry.

The self described "Queen of Battle". DADT.

[tonantius]

The only thing I see if you are forced to serve someone against your will, then that is slavery.

[Sharpienads]

Hey! I like the infantry.

Yeah, me too just busting the infantry's balls a little.


The self described "Queen of Battle". DADT.
[ROFL1]


The only thing I see if you are forced to serve someone against your will, then that is slavery.

Good point.

[Rucker61]

The only thing I see if you are forced to serve someone against your will, then that is marriage.

Fixed it for you.

[TFOGGER]

Do infants enjoy infantry as much as adults enjoy adultery?

[Sharpienads]

Do infants enjoy infantry as much as adults enjoy adultery?

Ha, how long have you been waiting to use that one? [ROFL1]

[TFOGGER]

Ha, how long have you been waiting to use that one? [ROFL1]

All my life...

[mevshooter]

It is right there in the statute

Okay, I must have missed that part.

With that said, as was previously mentioned, he didn't refuse to serve them, he refused to make a wedding cake. They could have ordered a generic cake if it HAD to be this guy, and dressed it up themselves.

[mevshooter]

I think the problem he may run into is the part at the beginning where it says A PERSON cannot do this, GOV is not a person. The Government however does issue Business licenses. I still fall to see how this is any different than not serving a different race or religion. Everyone here would be insane with anger if the shoe was on the other foot, but some how the other side is the crybaby when they don't get their way. I'm sure the anti-gun people say the same thing about us when we complain about not being able to CC in certain places.

Just to be clear if the shoe was on the other foot, I'd still be on the side of those that were refused service, be they Christian, Gay, Black, Manbearpig, or Infantry (luckily I can refuse service to Infanty[Flower]).

So this guy needs to violate his religious rights to serve their consumer rights?

It's not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.

[Rucker61]

Okay, I must have missed that part.

With that said, as was previously mentioned, he didn't refuse to serve them, he refused to make a wedding cake. They could have ordered a generic cake if it HAD to be this guy, and dressed it up themselves.

I think that's the detail that puts the high ground under the baker.

[Rucker61]

So this guy needs to violate his religious rights to serve their consumer rights?

It's not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.

Good point. It doesn't exactly fit this case, but how much legal precedence is there in case law for religious beliefs vs legal rights?

[mevshooter]

Good point. It doesn't exactly fit this case, but how much legal precedence is there in case law for religious beliefs vs legal rights?

Agreed. I'm not claiming any side or who is right "legally" speaking. This is an incredibly convoluted situation when all sides are considered.

[Jer]

Good point. It doesn't exactly fit this case, but how much legal precedence is there in case law for religious beliefs vs legal rights?

Technically his religious rights take precedence over someone's right to shop there because they can shop elsewhere. It's HIS shop so he can't just have a shop elsewhere. So in the case of conflicting rights I would guess that his right to practice his religion freely supersedes someone's right to buy a wedding cake.

I think this whole thing is stupid actually. If he doesn't want to sell something to someone in his own store he shouldn't be forced by anyone to do so. Especially when it's not a retail establishment where an item is in a package on a wall and just needs to be handed over in exchange for money. he has to actually craft the item from scratch so if someone doesn't want to put forth that effort for whatever reason I don't see how the government can make him. To me this is a bit absurd that this is even something the government get involved with. Next time I go to a BBQ place that refuses to serve me because their out of brisket I'm suing.

Why doesn't the couple just go someplace else? Seems like the easiest solution for everyone involved. No federal rulings required.

[Rucker61]

Why doesn't the couple just go someplace else? Seems like the easiest solution for everyone involved. No federal rulings required.

Easiest, yes, but I would say that perhaps they're tired of being told that they are second class citizens. In this case, I don't feel that their rights were violated, as they were offered other other fare. Even that may not be enough, though. Anyone else here remember when blacks weren't served in the front of restaurants? Same food, but not the same service, and that practice was brought to a halt.

[Sharpienads]

Technically his religious rights take precedence over someone's right to shop there because they can shop elsewhere. It's HIS shop so he can't just have a shop elsewhere. So in the case of conflicting rights I would guess that his right to practice his religion freely supersedes someone's right to buy a wedding cake.

I think this whole thing is stupid actually. If he doesn't want to sell something to someone in his own store he shouldn't be forced by anyone to do so. Especially when it's not a retail establishment where an item is in a package on a wall and just needs to be handed over in exchange for money. he has to actually craft the item from scratch so if someone doesn't want to put forth that effort for whatever reason I don't see how the government can make him. To me this is a bit absurd that this is even something the government get involved with. Next time I go to a BBQ place that refuses to serve me because their out of brisket I'm suing.

Why doesn't the couple just go someplace else? Seems like the easiest solution for everyone involved. No federal rulings required.

Yeah, unfortunately you're talking about self government and free market solutions... As if those actually work. (/sarcasm)

I mean, if they're upset that the baker won't make them a wedding cake, they have every right to complain and tell their friends about it. If enough people agree with their point of view, the baker will go out of business. If people appreciate the baker standing up for what he believes in, he will stay in business.

The rights of the recipient do not outweigh the rights of the provider. He should not be forced to bake them a cake, and his reason for not doing so is perfectly legitimate.

[Jer]

Easiest, yes, but I would say that perhaps they're tired of being told that they are second class citizens. In this case, I don't feel that their rights were violated, as they were offered other other fare. Even that may not be enough, though. Anyone else here remember when blacks weren't served in the front of restaurants? Same food, but not the same service, and that practice was brought to a halt.

I knew someone was going to say that as I was typing it but I fail to draw a parallel between blacks being denied basic necessities (food, water, employment, transportation, etc) with a homosexuals desire for a fancy cake. That's not to say that I don't think blacks and homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights because I actually think they should even though that may not be the popular stance on this site. I'm all for their rights and even think they should be allowed to get married... that being said I just don't put this guy's plight with wanting a wedding cake on par with Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus. I don't get people clamoring to call this a huge case for gay rights because as far as I'm concerned... it isn't. Hell, my wife and I didn't even have a cake on our wedding and that didn't change shit.

Does that make more sense? I'm not anti-gay rights I just don't see this as being a gay rights issue I guess.

[Rucker61]

Does that make more sense? I'm not anti-gay rights I just don't see this as being a gay rights issue I guess.

I'd say that I agree with you. Had he refused them service entirely, discrimination raises its ugly head and runs afoul of state statutes. I also agree this case isn't directly comparable to Jim Crow. I'm not a lawyer, though. My parents were married, you see.

[Jer]

Yeah, unfortunately you're talking about self government and free market solutions... As if those actually work. (/sarcasm)

I mean, if they're upset that the baker won't make them a wedding cake, they have every right to complain and tell their friends about it. If enough people agree with their point of view, the baker will go out of business. If people appreciate the baker standing up for what he believes in, he will stay in business.

The rights of the recipient do not outweigh the rights of the provider. He should not be forced to bake them a cake, and his reason for not doing so is perfectly legitimate.

I can agree with the bulk of this statement. Why would they even want to do business with an outfit like that? I know if I went into a place that didn't do business with fat people I wouldn't cry a river over it I would go to another place and make sure everyone I knew knew what a shitty place that was. I sure as shit wouldn't feel the need to get the media, government and (eventually) the supreme court involved over a gawt damn cake. It's a cake.

[Sharpienads]

Easiest, yes, but I would say that perhaps they're tired of being told that they are second class citizens. In this case, I don't feel that their rights were violated, as they were offered other other fare. Even that may not be enough, though. Anyone else here remember when blacks weren't served in the front of restaurants? Same food, but not the same service, and that practice was brought to a halt.

IMHO, I don't agree with the gays are the new blacks argument. I'm not fully convinced being gay is natural. Being black is. Furthermore, the government that they want to involve is the same government that upheld slavery, separate but equal, and putting Americans of Japanese decent in internment camps. When will people learn that government is not the answer? Hell, if the gay movement wasn't such a liberal movement that seeks to centralize power whenever possible, they probably wouldn't have to go to MA to get married because instead of asking the government for permission, they'd tell the government to go eff themselves, you can't tell me who I can or can't marry. I think a lot more people would be behind the movement if it took that approach.

[Rucker61]

IMHO, I don't agree with the gays are the new blacks argument. I'm not fully convinced being gay is natural. Being black is. Furthermore, the government that they want to involve is the same government that upheld slavery, separate but equal, and putting Americans of Japanese decent in internment camps. When will people learn that government is not the answer? Hell, if the gay movement wasn't such a liberal movement that seeks to centralize power whenever possible, they probably wouldn't have to go to MA to get married because instead of asking the government for permission, they'd tell the government to go eff themselves, you can't tell me who I can or can't marry. I think a lot more people would be behind the movement if it took that approach.

Government can be the answer. Blacks wouldn't have civil rights, especially in the South, if the Feds hadn't gotten involved. That's also the same government that gave women equal rights and established guidelines to limit the ability of private companies to poison our environment.

I wish it was as simple as telling the government that they don't have the ability to allow gay marriage, but too many partner benefits require the force of law.

[Jer]

IMHO, I don't agree with the gays are the new blacks argument. I'm not fully convinced being gay is natural. Being black is. Furthermore, the government that they want to involve is the same government that upheld slavery, separate but equal, and putting Americans of Japanese decent in internment camps. When will people learn that government is not the answer? Hell, if the gay movement wasn't such a liberal movement that seeks to centralize power whenever possible, they probably wouldn't have to go to MA to get married because instead of asking the government for permission, they'd tell the government to go eff themselves, you can't tell me who I can or can't marry. I think a lot more people would be behind the movement if it took that approach.

While I don't agree with the first part of your statement that I made bold I can agree with the rest. People depend on the govt for WAY too much these days. You want to get married? Go do it. Since when does the govt decide who gets married and who doesn't? Wasn't it WE THE PEOPLE who invented getting married anyway? I wasn't aware that was a privilege that the government allowed us to have if they thought us fit to receive.

[Jer]

Government can be the answer. Blacks wouldn't have civil rights, especially in the South, if the Feds hadn't gotten involved. That's also the same government that gave women equal rights and established guidelines to limit the ability of private companies to poison our environment.

I wish it was as simple as telling the government that they don't have the ability to allow gay marriage, but too many partner benefits require the force of law.

All of that was prior to the government being out of control with power and it's only getting worse. I mean they tell us what light bulbs we can and can't buy now. Seriously? There was a time when the government needed to step in when the majority was wrong on something but those days are over. The government doesn't step in on this meaningful and required (immigration for instance) yet feels the need to create tens of thousands of new laws telling us what we can and can't eat or buy. It gets to the point where if the government did rule on something important I wouldn't pay much mind to it because I've learned such a lack of respect for government decisions over the years. There was a time when the government said 'Blacks get equal rights' or 'Women get the right to vote' and people took notice. Now so many things are passed and so much of it is BS.. does anyone even care anymore?

[Sharpienads]

Government can be the answer. Blacks wouldn't have civil rights, especially in the South, if the Feds hadn't gotten involved. That's also the same government that gave women equal rights and established guidelines to limit the ability of private companies to poison our environment.

I wish it was as simple as telling the government that they don't have the ability to allow gay marriage, but too many partner benefits require the force of law.

Everything you mentioned there were movements that were started by individuals or groups of people. Maybe the government codified those beliefs into law, but it wasn't their original idea to begin the movement.

What benefits require marriage? I really don't know the answer to this. But taxes shouldn't be one. That's a whole other discussion.

[Jer]

Everything you mentioned there were movements that were started by individuals or groups of people. Maybe the government codified those beliefs into law, but it wasn't their original idea to begin the movement.

What benefits require marriage? I really don't know the answer to this. But taxes shouldn't be one. That's a whole other discussion.

Exactly. Take away tax advantages and what not to getting married (government's failed attempt to legislate morality just like the failed war on drugs and many other things I could mention) and let people get married if they want to get married. Life is too short to focus your energy on preventing two individuals who love each other the ability to get married. I see too much of the ugly side of people every day to care about those who actually love each other. Good for them.

[Rooskibar03]

Government can be the answer. Blacks wouldn't have civil rights, especially in the South, if the Feds hadn't gotten involved. That's also the same government that gave women equal rights and established guidelines to limit the ability of private companies to poison our environment.

I wish it was as simple as telling the government that they don't have the ability to allow gay marriage, but too many partner benefits require the force of law.

There is this thing called The Constition that dictates what the Government can and cannot do. I'll give you a moment to find me the section that says they have any authority on marriage at the federal level.

Being gay is a lifestyle choice. Being black is not. Everyone is afforded life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing about gay marriage or equal rights based on choices you make in life.

[Scanker19]

Everything you mentioned there were movements that were started by individuals or groups of people. Maybe the government codified those beliefs into law, but it wasn't their original idea to begin the movement.

What benefits require marriage? I really don't know the answer to this. But taxes shouldn't be one. That's a whole other discussion.

I think he means getting health care, and other benefits from a same-sex couple i.e. gay soldiers can't get benefits from the other as the Gov doesn't recognize their marriage as legit.

[Scanker19]

There is this thing called The Constition that dictates what the Government can and cannot do. I'll give you a moment to find me the section that says they have any authority on marriage at the federal level.

Being gay is a lifestyle choice. Being black is not. Everyone is afforded life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing about gay marriage or equal rights based on choices you make in life.

Nothing says not either. Pursuit of Happiness doesn't have an asterisk next to it.

[Rooskibar03]

Nothing says not either. Pursuit of Happiness doesn't have an asterisk next to it.


Gay marriage, any marriage for that point would fall under Article 10 and would be left up to the states. Seems most of the states have put this issue to vote and the people continue to vote it down.

[Rucker61]

Gay marriage, any marriage for that point would fall under Article 10 and would be left up to the states. Seems most of the states have put this issue to vote and the people continue to vote it down.

So how the majority votes is always right, moral and ethical?

[Rooskibar03]

So how the majority votes is always right, moral and ethical?

Who are you to determine what is moral and ethical? If you want to be technical the nation was founded on Christian values and morals, which are the basis for the founding documents.

The majority of this nation supports the definition of marriage as it stands. That is what makes this country great. We The People rule and dictate how we choose to live. As much as the progressives want to take this control away from us it will not happen.

[spyder]

All that believe that there should be a law against gay couples getting hitched, say I! Now all of you that just said I need to realize that you are no different than the liberal society that thinks that guns should be banned because they think it's the right thing to do. You are the same (just different topics). I just thought I'd point that out real quick. [Beer]

[Rucker61]

Who are you to determine what is moral and ethical? If you want to be technical the nation was founded on Christian values and morals, which are the basis for the founding documents.


That's nice of you to believe that, but it doesn't make it true. Or the right thing to do. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist, not a Theist. "In God We Trust" and "under God" are relatively new additions to US mottos and the pledge. I can agree that this country had a lot of Christianity absorbed into the founding documents, but it was not the basis. I don't see Christ mentioned at all, and the only references to a deity were the seemingly unChristian terms "Nature's God" and "Creator".



The majority of this nation supports the definition of marriage as it stands.



That also isn't necessarily true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_of_same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States




That is what makes this country great. We The People rule and dictate how we choose to live. As much as the progressives want to take this control away from us it will not happen.

The majority also used to dictate that Blacks didn't have the same civil rights as whites. Majority rule can also be mob rule, and that's not an American ideal.

[Monky]

Not like they can increase the divorce rate more than it is now. Marriage is a sham at this point in the world, with the exception of a few of you guys on here who have been married longer than some of us have been alive..

We've seen a lot of divorces in the last few years w/ members here, some going through shit now. You really think that a 'marriage' between someone of the same sex is going to ruin the sanctity of marriage?

The divorces will be much more drama filled (entertaining), there won't be kids to be ripped apart and having to listen to the 'parents' hate each other for the rest of their lives. Ask me how a bad divorce can totally skew your perception of a relationship in life.. My parents didn't make it two years.

My aunt and her gf (yes she is a lesbian) were together for 30 years before she was no longer with us. Lasted longer than ANY marriage in my entire family.. it wasn't legal but they were together, and I still do not see anything wrong with it.

As for the cake shop, they are free to do whatever the fuck they want. It's their business. Hell if they make the best cakes and I happen to be by there I might stop in, but it wouldn't be because they are against gay marriage. It'd be because of the product they produce. Just like chick-fil-a, I may not share the same feelings as Truit Cathy or whatever his name is.. but damn if anyone else has a better chicken sammich or nuggets.

I have several gay friends, most of which have been in a relationship longer than any of mine have lasted.. If they want to get married then so be it. They can't do any worse than the rest of us. [Coffee]

[Irving]

Way behind in this thread, but baking a cake isn't practicing religion.

[Rucker61]

Way behind in this thread, but baking a cake isn't practicing religion.

I hear it's pretty damn good cake.

[Scanker19]

If you want to be technical the nation was founded on Christian values and morals, which are the basis for the founding documents.


It was? Doesn't the First Amendment restrict the establishment of a state run church, in addition to not restricting the the free practice (or not to practice) of one's religion.

[ronaldrwl]

I think I'll stop by there today around 11:30 to see how good their cake is. They're right by the Army Surplus store and that's always worth a look.

[TFOGGER]

Way behind in this thread, but baking a cake isn't practicing religion.

What if the cake is so good, eating it is a religious experience?

[Rucker61]

With all the hoopla over this bakery and Chick-Fil-A, some Marketing wonk has to be creating a name for the activity and working on a way to make it a standard marketing ploy. Sort of like a reverse viral marketing plan.

[Rooskibar03]

It was? Doesn't the First Amendment restrict the establishment of a state run church, in addition to not restricting the the free practice (or not to practice) of one's religion.

There is a difference between the Federal government endorsing any specific religion and the beliefs of the people who founded our nation and wrote those documents.  They specially wrote the 1st Amendment to protect citizens from the same type of government they have just fought and escaped from, the British monarchy, where they were forced to support the church. That is why it’s the FIRST amendment; we are all free to believe what we want without persecution.
 
That said if you delve into history one cannot dispute there was a Christian influence in the life of the founders

[Ronin13]

Remember folks, they didn't refuse service to them for being gay, they said they serve gays, they just don't make gay wedding cakes... that didn't sound right. They just don't make cakes for gay weddings. You get my point. So these stupid gay people need to shut up already and move on. This business doesn't support or agree with gay marriage, but they'll still make you a birthday cake- find a gay supportive cake shop and stop pushing your beliefs on everyone else.

[Great-Kazoo]

Would a bakery that had Obama support stickers and well known supporter of democratic ideals, refuse to make a cake that had a Gun Theme? If so would there be as much of an outcry from people as there is regarding this business owners choice?
Doubt it. That is the difference, anyone of us would look for a bakery that would fill our order. The other side of the coin wants to be treated as a specific class of society and will do anything and everything in their power, to see we as society comply with their train of thought. That is why America is on the edge of (if not already sliding down in to) failure.

[ChunkyMonkey]

^^^ +1 I know a doctor who was such a strong Obama supporter that kicked me out of his office after I presented some facts.

[ronaldrwl]

Both Chick-Fil-A and Masterpiece Cake Shop were busy today. I got some goodies from the bakery. The oatmeal raisin cookies are wonderful.

[T-Giv]

This kinda stuff is out of control. I'm glad he told them to GTFO and go pound sand. They preach tolerance and respecting other's beliefs until their beliefs aren't praised somewhere, then it all goes to hell. Such hypocrisy.

[mevshooter]

Modern LGBT movement, modern feminist movement, and modern civil rights movement all have one thing in common.

They are no longer about equal rights, they are about elevating themselves ABOVE the majority. It is just disguised as "equal rights" because of things like same sex marriage. Dig a little deeper, and its really a distraction for what they are really trying to accomplish.

When I married my wife, I pledged to GOD in Heaven that I would love and honor her for our entire lives. I didn't pledge to the state, the government, or the country as a whole. The paper was merely a formality for tax and medical purposes.

If same sex marriage is allowed it doesn't detract a single thing from my marriage, because as a born again Christian who doesn't believe in same sex marriage, I don't have to recognize its legitimacy in my personal life.

Tax breaks? Medical care? Those do not define a single thing about a true, honest, committed marriage as I see it in the eyes of God. Give it to them. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I find same sex marriage to be no different than friends of mine who simply get married because they got pregnant, or people who get married because they are afraid of being alone, or the laundry list of other crap reasons some people get married these days.

Do I believe that at one point and time the U.S. was a Christian nation? Yes. Do I believe that is the case nowadays? No. I didn't buy guns to prepare for the end of the world and Christ's return, I bought them for the collapse of this country. Simple as that.



... I really want cake and chick fil a.

[kanekutter05]

Modern LGBT movement, modern feminist movement, and modern civil rights movement all have one thing in common.

They are no longer about equal rights, they are about elevating themselves ABOVE the majority. It is just disguised as "equal rights" because of things like same sex marriage. Dig a little deeper, and its really a distraction for what they are really trying to accomplish.

When I married my wife, I pledged to GOD in Heaven that I would love and honor her for our entire lives. I didn't pledge to the state, the government, or the country as a whole. The paper was merely a formality for tax and medical purposes.

If same sex marriage is allowed it doesn't detract a single thing from my marriage, because as a born again Christian who doesn't believe in same sex marriage, I don't have to recognize its legitimacy in my personal life.

Tax breaks? Medical care? Those do not define a single thing about a true, honest, committed marriage as I see it in the eyes of God. Give it to them. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I find same sex marriage to be no different than friends of mine who simply get married because they got pregnant, or people who get married because they are afraid of being alone, or the laundry list of other crap reasons some people get married these days.

Do I believe that at one point and time the U.S. was a Christian nation? Yes. Do I believe that is the case nowadays? No. I didn't buy guns to prepare for the end of the world and Christ's return, I bought them for the collapse of this country. Simple as that.



... I really want cake and chick fil a.

+100,000,000

[Zundfolge]

Dig a little deeper, and its really a distraction for what they are really trying to accomplish.
THIS

The entire purpose of political correctness in general is to create divisions in society to keep groups of people fighting among themselves and thus are distracted by what the leftist elites are actually trying to do.

Its all part and parcel of Frankfurt School Critical Theory of Marxism. You divide people into groups and get those groups to fight each other while simultaneously tearing down the dominant culture.

The only way you'll get the workers of the world to unite in glorious communist revolution is if you destroy each of the cultures they all live in.

A factory worker in Berlin has more in common with the factory owner in Berlin than he has with a farm worker outside Buenos Aires and likewise the farm worker outside Buenos Aires has more in common with the Argentine Bourgeoises than his fellow workers in other parts of the world.

THAT is why global communist revolution hasn't worked in the estimation of the Marxists, and that's why the traditional (ie dominant) cultures must be destroyed. Free market capitalism and Judeo/Christian morality/ethics are the basis of western culture, so you destroy those first and then the workers of the world will finally unite under the Marxist banner.

[Colorado Luckydog]

You can't blame the gay guys for being grumpy. You would be grumpy too if everytime you had sex your ass hurt!

[Byte Stryke]

That's nice of you to believe that, but it doesn't make it true. Or the right thing to do. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist, not a Theist. "In God We Trust" and "under God" are relatively new additions to US mottos and the pledge. I can agree that this country had a lot of Christianity absorbed into the founding documents, but it was not the basis. I don't see Christ mentioned at all, and the only references to a deity were the seemingly unChristian terms "Nature's God" and "Creator".


That also isn't necessarily true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_of_same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States



The majority also used to dictate that Blacks didn't have the same civil rights as whites. Majority rule can also be mob rule, and that's not an American ideal.



http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/24391547.jpg

[oinco]

I have used Masterpiece for years! Glad to see them on the same side of the fence.

[Ronin13]

You can't blame the gay guys for being grumpy. You would be grumpy too if everytime you had sex your ass hurt!

[ROFL1] Oh my god, that kills me! HAHAHA! [LOL]

[T-Giv]

[ROFL1] Oh my god, that kills me! HAHAHA! [LOL]

I, on the other hand, don't see the humor. My wife is ROUGH and she is a spanker. [ROFL2]

[Colorado Luckydog]

I, on the other hand, don't see the humor. My wife is ROUGH and she is a spanker. [ROFL2]

[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3][ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3]

[T-Giv]

She would be very unimpressed if she read that I was spilling her secrets! [Tooth]

[jplove71]

Just watched a video about this cake shop on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c3#/video/us/2012/08/05/dnt-activists-debate-cake-shop-gay-stance.kusa). The "gay community" just doesn't get it and most likely never will. They continue to seek attention for themselves in an effort to "be accepted" by others whenever a private business owner expresses their beliefs that are different than their own.

[BushMasterBoy]

Next they will want a gay coffin shaped like a phallus...