Bakery Faces Boycott for Refusing to Make Gay Wedding Cake

[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.

[Rucker61]

It actually is illegal.

What legal excerpt is that from?

[newracer]

What legal excerpt is that from?

Colorado Revised Statute 24-34-601

[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.

[sniper7]

It actually is illegal.

so what kind of punishment could he be looking at?

[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.

[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...

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.