They have absolutely no right to refuse to sell food off-the-shelf to a hungry customer, just because the customer holds pro-homosexuality beliefs with which they disagree, or admits to intending to practise homosexuality, which they would regard as sinful. If that is what they did, they deserve to be sued. That would be discrimination.
On the other hand, they have every right to refuse to decorate a cake with what amounts to a customised statement of congratulations on a same sex "wedding". Freedom of speech surely includes the freedom NOT to make any statement with which one disagrees, just as much as it includes the freedom to make any statement with which one DOES agree. If that is all they did, they should stand their ground, and take this to the Supreme Court of the USA if need be.
That's where the line has to be drawn. Simple.
Religion doesn't have to enter into it.
OTOH, if he'd refused to sell a cake to a mixed race couple, there'd be no doubt it was discrimination, no matter his religious beliefs.
Oddly enough gay marriage is not constitutionally legal in Oregon. It is still a gray area, counties can and have issued marriage licenses (that were subsequently declared void and unconstitutional). Oregon does recognise civil unions between gay partners. As an Oregonian, I wonder why this is a problem. I guess service providers have no personal rights but selected other classes do?
I am sure there is another bakery in town. Just because someone does not want to do something for you does not mean it is hate or discrimination. The problem today is everyone wants to be right and point a finger at another. Life is too short. Take you pride and stuff it in your pocket and move on. Everyone has there rights!
How disgraceful. The bakery owner has his beliefs and it is his business so he can decide what is proper or not. I agree with the bakery owner. Damn this homosexuality, it is a disgusting lifestyle and against Judeo-Christian beliefs.
So if I were gay go somewhere else where they want your business and shut up
leave this man alone and move on
that is what us straight people do....if we don't get the service we want we move on
God so sick of this gay issue...............just do what everyone else does and grow up please
Everyone knew from the beginning that the whole purpose of the gay marriage "cause" was to create excuses to sue people.
When this country used to be free,we used to be able to reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. They should sue the hell out of the gay couple for infringing in this right. Hey gays who want to get married, stop trying to force everyone to accept your way of life! We live in a free country, and it's called freedom of association. And administrative law and politically correct "anti-discrimination" laws are BS, but are taking over!
ALL laws and local ordinances banning "discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation" (or "gender identity") should be REPEALED. The states and locales which are still following the First Amendment must heed this warning from the Oregon baker.
Here's a map showing the 21 states that already have these unconstitutional laws: http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/issue_maps/non_discrimination_1_12_color.pdf
16 of those states have also added "gender identity" as a protected group. Men in women's bathrooms, boys in girls' restrooms and locker rooms in schools.
Time to end this insanity.
This is tyranny against a person's first ammendment rights ....the thought police are out in force aided and abetted by the local news media. These people run a private business and the government at any level has no right to interfere. Maybe the couple should go to an obuttheadd governement bakery for their cake.
Political Correctness is really Punitive Conformity.
Political Correctness was floated as way to prevent hurting people's feelings, but was actually intentionally forged as a means to enforce politically concocted norms (and unconstitutional) ‘human rights’, such as:
'the right to sexual gratification',
'the right to make sexual desire the basis of one's identity, orientation and/or gender'
'the right to force everyone to approve, agree with and accommodate your desired form of sexual gratification and your perceived orientation.'
'the right to teach your form of sexual gratification to little children at the expense of taxpayers, despite overwhelming evidence that it is dangerous and unhealthy'
'the right to use whatever restroom you want, dress the way you want because of your sexual orientation or perceived gender'
'the right to engage in your sexual gratification in public parks without interruption'
'the right to proudly parade one's sexuality in the streets'
‘the right to free contraception and abortion.’
Sexual deviance, abortion and Islam are the three protected and exempted groups among the Politically Correct Obama crowd. Those holding traditional Judeo-Christian convictions and values are without protection from their persecution.
This just takes the cake!
What about no shirt, no shoes, no service? Is that discriminatory as well.
"NO GROOM, NO BRIDE, NO SERVICE !
How is it illegal to refuse service to anyone? I remember (through the years) going into many stores that had signs that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"....or something like that. "No shirt, no service", etc. It's coming down to the left making it illegal to be anti-liberal. This is bullcrap.
I have a T-shirt that has a picture of Mohammed with a bomb on his head. I also have a T-shirt that says, Its Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. I put them away cause I was growing tired of arguing with people. With all that's going on I'm back in the mood.
It's not so much a "1st Amendment" right as it is the Right to private property that's being challenged. Bakery's a private business that doesn't have to bow to public policy. That's why they post signs that say "Management reserves the right to refuse service to anyone."
Smoking bans challenge the same rights.
The bakery should apologize and tell the gays to make up for the misunderstanding we will make a special cake for them and put it on their menu. The Butt cake. Round brown triple decked cake. The NEW pound cake. Sorry guys but I can't stop myself. Its too easy.
When gays sue over something like this it is clear all they are trying to do is push their agenda. Hard to believe that there aren't plenty of other bakeries who could make them a cake. Why would you want someone who thinks your marriage is an abomination to provide you a cake? I'd be worried they'd use some nasty ingredients if forced to make it.
What is also being talked about in some countries like Russia and America is the low birthrate. With more and more gay unions being encouraged...aren't we only adding to the problem? The Dems think they have it solved as it increases their voter base as well. Free flow of immigration. But they have not taken into account one thing. By allowing Latinos and Muslims at an alarming rate they are doing, it could backfire....they are the most intolerate persons of homosexuality.
The elitists of this world are big proponents of population control, it's no wonder then they encourage gay unions and birth control.
I hadn't looked at it in that light before, but of course you're right. The elitists of this world are also virulently anti-Christian, except for the liberal, social justice kind -- which are pseudo-Christian. It is no wonder they shake their fists at God, controlled as they are by the prince of darkness.
So there are no private businesses anymore..? I just read an article about a boy who killed himself..he was abused as a child ,by a male neighbor, which in turn made him think he was gay, which in turn made him very confused..how many of these people were abused >??? Is it fair that we all have to believe the same thing??? Do they know how Muslims feel about this..because as a Christian I am quite tolerant..I pray for the sinner and hate the sin..I love those I know that are gay , and they don't ask me to change because of it. In the last two weeks I have been told about two instances where women are divorcing their husbands, Don't want the kids, or the pets....Just the house and a girlfriend , they are now lesbians..You can not tell me that this evolves..Growing up , some people seemed different , I believe "some" are born this way..I don't believe you can suddenly become gay.
More importantly I have a bible, I didn't write..So send your replies to God..thanks to Loyd Marcus for pointing them out...
Lev. 18:22: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”
Lev. 20:13: “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act;…”
Rom. 1:26-27, ” … for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts … “
If it were a muslim bakery, they wouldn't have even thought about it. It's time to start fighting back these evil people.
Haven't I read somewhere that the 1st Amendment trumps the curbing of it by the Several States? Somewhere in the universe, even the left, have come out in support of Amendment number one.
Not according to Chai Feldmann, the Obama appointed head of the EOCC. She -- a lesbian -- believes in a "hierarchy" of rights in which the rights of homosexuals trumps the rights of Christians. See here:
Her view: "Society Should ‘Not Tolerate Private Beliefs’ That ‘Adversely Affect’ Homosexuals."
This is what we're up against, folks. It is little wonder that tiny battles are being waged all over the nation as first one business then another is being sued to bring them into alignment with the new state-imposed atheistic/secular worldview. America is making it clear: Christians not welcome here.
We reject Sharia Law from entering western jurisprudence as an intrusion of religious law into civil law. Similarly is this case. The founders would agree; most particularly Thomas Jefferson. We can't have it both ways.
Meanwhile, over here, there's this:
"Conservative party ripped apart by gay marriage vote
The full scale of this week’s revolt by Conservative MPs against David Cameron’s plans to introduce same-sex marriage became clear on Saturday."
Over here, it is a full-out war against conservatives, traditional Tories and of course Christians, instigated by 'modernisers', who hope to win the gay vote (fat chance!), and diss their core voters, yet again.
If you want to get the full flavour of this war, then read this very strange post and the comments here:
That 'Home' is being rapidly dismantled.
A lot of people like to quote Romans 13 when speaking of a Christian's duty to the state. Yet they never quote the passage that states "we would rather obey the laws of God than men". Where man's laws clash with God's laws, we are obliged to observe God's law and reject man's law. As the Founders so aptly put it: "We have no King but King Jesus".
And let's not forgot this, Matthew 24:9-14
"9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."
Even as we pray for God's mercy on our nation, we see the direction we're headed; yet no matter our suffering here for His name's sake, the future of those who reject God's forgiveness is to suffer eternally in hell. Therefore, pray for our enemies, as we are taught to do.
That's all fine and well, but the passage is not germaine to the larger point that I'm making which is that when the laws of man clash with the laws of God, we are to obey the laws of God and disobey the laws of the state. When it comes down to questions of morality, Gods laws take precedence over man's laws.
I would say that that is a huge change. My point is that obedience to God is going to cost something tangible, now, as before it was mostly personal, in how one lived one's life, quite apart from state-sponsored pressure to abandon one's beliefs.
That has been going on since Tom Hayden's SDS's manifesto, the Port Huron Statement in 1962. Nothing has changed except that the left now holds both the culture and the reigns of power.
Again, you're diverting from my main point. Try and argue what I stated instead of going off in tangents.
And yet another link to my main contention, that liberalism is gearing up to silence opposition altogether: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/024107.html (The Left's Increasingly Murderous Hatred For Conservatives). Are not Christians conservatives?
You have no argument from me there, 911Infidel, that we obey God's laws and not man's -- when they conflict. My point is merely an extension of yours when coupled with the topic of this thread: the more we see these incursions on our First Amendment Rights (as this Cake's case makes clear) -- and as we stand our ground in obeying God rather than man -- it is not unreasonable to remember that as society becomes increasingly hostile to both our beliefs and our commitment to them, its leaders will begin to speak more openly about eliminating us altogether. See here, for example: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/024160.html (The Liberal Will To Murder).