Lesbian couple refused wedding cake files state discrimination complaint

[crandc]

so...the only rights that count are the rights tthat you agree with?

I dont follow an orgonized religion, so by your statement here, would I have no rights?

funny, I thought we all still had First Amendment rights

Where did that come from? Of course, they can believe what they want. Even if it's stupid. And I follow no religion either, what has that to do with anything I said? However, any business is subject to secular law. Period. No exceptions. They can no more violate non discrimination laws than they can legally violate minimum wage, or health laws, or any other law. They do have First Amendment rights to talk publicly about how much they hate gay people. Or hate minimum wage. Or hate the fact that they can't have cockroaches and rats in their kitchen. Or anything else. Most business owners don't find that a good idea, but they have the right to say that stuff. They still have to follow the law. No exceptions.

As ugly as their actions are, the bakery is private property, and the owners really should be able to refuse to serve who they choose. The recourse is to patronize the bakery up the street who wants the business.

What are you going to do, send in the SWAT team to force the people to make the cake?

The bakery may be private property but again, business follow laws or faces consequences. Just like individuals. It may be private property but this couple's taxes pay for their police and fire protection, pays for the health inspectors that certify the food is safe to eat, pays for the roads employees and customers use to get there, pays for the schools employees attend to learn basic skills and community colleges where people learn to bake. No need to send in a SWAT team. There are other ways to enforce the law, like what this couple did. Because otherwise you are sayiing straight couples have access to 100% of businesses (if they can pay, of course) but gay couples only have access to (100%-bigot) businesses.

 

[Denny Crane]

What is your feeling about companies that sue for slander when someone writes a negative review?

The truth is the best defense.

 

[Denny Crane]

The bakery may be private property but again, business follow laws or faces consequences. Just like individuals. It may be private property but this couple's taxes pay for their police and fire protection, pays for the health inspectors that certify the food is safe to eat, pays for the roads employees and customers use to get there, pays for the schools employees attend to learn basic skills and community colleges where people learn to bake. No need to send in a SWAT team. There are other ways to enforce the law, like what this couple did. Because otherwise you are sayiing straight couples have access to 100% of businesses (if they can pay, of course) but gay couples only have access to (100%-bigot) businesses.

You already said that. The bakery pays plenty of tax to pay to be inspected and otherwise interfered with.

You didn't answer my question. Are you going to send in the SWAT team to force these people to bake a cake? They simply refuse. You going to close down their business? That seems worse than refusing to bake the cake.

Property rights are one of the great things about this nation. They come with far more good than bad, but you have to deal with the bad.

 

[BlazerWookee]

The baker is an asshole for refusing to make the cake, but it's his right to be an asshole. The couple are assholes for dragging this into the courts, but it's their right to be assholes.

My advice to the couple would be to find a baker who wants their business. My advice to the baker would be to STFU and make the damned cake.

If this makes it to a court date, I hope the baker countersues for violation of the Free Exercise Clause...

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/i...an_couple_refused_wedding.html#incart_m-rpt-2



So how do you folks feel about this? Personally I think the complaint is without merit. While I sympathize with the same-sex couple I believe a business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone they want.

I agree.

That said, Christian or not, it is shallow and wrong. They should have provided the cake.

 

[Eastoff]

The baker is an asshole for refusing to make the cake, but it's his right to be an asshole. The couple are assholes for dragging this into the courts, but it's their right to be assholes.

My advice to the couple would be to find a baker who wants their business. My advice to the baker would be to STFU and make the damned cake.

If this makes it to a court date, I hope the baker countersues for violation of the Free Exercise Clause...

I think this sums it up well.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

You already said that. The bakery pays plenty of tax to pay to be inspected and otherwise interfered with.

You didn't answer my question. Are you going to send in the SWAT team to force these people to bake a cake? They simply refuse. You going to close down their business? That seems worse than refusing to bake the cake.

Property rights are one of the great things about this nation. They come with far more good than bad, but you have to deal with the bad.

You don't send a SWAT team, you hit them where it hurts which is in the pocketbook. Gov't can fine them (if warranted) and Jane Public can sue them for money. If Jane wins, I'm guessing the business will change their practices accordingly and they will bake the cake next time (without the use of SWAT)

Seems pretty obvious since that is what is happening here.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

The baker is an asshole for refusing to make the cake, but it's his right to be an asshole. The couple are assholes for dragging this into the courts, but it's their right to be assholes.

My advice to the couple would be to find a baker who wants their business. My advice to the baker would be to STFU and make the damned cake.

If this makes it to a court date, I hope the baker countersues for violation of the Free Exercise Clause...

Seriously.

Fuck the baker.

Fuck the lesbian couple.

They're both stupid.

It should 100% be the bakers right not to make a cake for anyone for any reason.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Seriously.

Fuck the baker.

Fuck the lesbian couple.

They're both stupid.

It should 100% be the bakers right not to make a cake for anyone for any reason.

Agreed.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Seriously.

Fuck the baker.

Fuck the lesbian couple.

They're both stupid.

It should 100% be the bakers right not to make a cake for anyone for any reason.

So they can refuse to sell to Black people . . . or only offer week old cakes to Black people.

 

[Denny Crane]

You don't send a SWAT team, you hit them where it hurts which is in the pocketbook. Gov't can fine them (if warranted) and Jane Public can sue them for money. If Jane wins, I'm guessing the business will change their practices accordingly and they will bake the cake next time (without the use of SWAT)

Seems pretty obvious since that is what is happening here.

That would be the "close down their business" part.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

QT Crandc

" any business is subject to secular law. Period. No exceptions. They can no more violate non discrimination laws than they can legally violate minimum wage, or health laws, or any other law. They do have First Amendment rights to talk publicly about how much they hate gay people. Or hate minimum wage. Or hate the fact that they can't have cockroaches and rats in their kitchen. Or anything else. Most business owners don't find that a good idea, but they have the right to say that stuff. They still have to follow the law. No exceptions. "

I never read anywhere where this religous couple ever said anything about how much they "hate gay people"..

I also am wondering what "law" these business owners are breaking by refusing service..I dont think the reason has any bearing here..

 

[MickZagger]

It's 2013 and people still discriminate against gays?

Sad.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

So they can refuse to sell to Black people . . .

Yes. That is a reason, and I said any reason.

or only offer week old cakes to Black people.

If the people want to accept the offer of week old cakes, then why the hell not?

 

[crandc]

QT Crandc

" any business is subject to secular law. Period. No exceptions. They can no more violate non discrimination laws than they can legally violate minimum wage, or health laws, or any other law. They do have First Amendment rights to talk publicly about how much they hate gay people. Or hate minimum wage. Or hate the fact that they can't have cockroaches and rats in their kitchen. Or anything else. Most business owners don't find that a good idea, but they have the right to say that stuff. They still have to follow the law. No exceptions. "

I never read anywhere where this religous couple ever said anything about how much they "hate gay people"..

I also am wondering what "law" these business owners are breaking by refusing service..I dont think the reason has any bearing here..

I did not say they said they hate gays; I said First Amendment says they have the legal right to say that but not to treat gay couples differently. The law in question is state anti discrimination law that forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

That would be the "close down their business" part.

I don't know about that. Many companies have been fined or lose lawsuits and continue to exist.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Yes. That is a reason, and I said any reason.



If the people want to accept the offer of week old cakes, then why the hell not?

Well I'm glad we have laws in place against that as that is not a society I would want to live in.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't know about that. Many companies have been fined or lose lawsuits and continue to exist.

Companies like this bakery?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

BTW- I don't like this lawsuit. But if there is ever a place in Oregon to file and prevail with this lawsuit . . . Multnomah County is the place.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Companies like this bakery?

Don't know much about this bakery, but many tiny businesses get sued and settle the case without going out of business. They probably will never make that mistake again, but they don't go out of business. I sued a small management company that screwed me over. They paid via settlement and continue to run their practice.

 

[magnifier661]

The irony is that it's not very christian to hate, belittle and ostracize someone for their life style and beliefs. Disagree all you want but love thy neighbor, right?

WWJD?

I like this comment a lot and agree

 

[magnifier661]

And if a Muslim business wanted to refuse a jewish couple?

They have every right to do so

 

[magnifier661]

This ain't gonna stick, but damage is already done. This bakery will probably have a bunch of lesbians protesting them. Or maybe it's not damaged?! Maybe the right wing will support them more!

 

[Denny Crane]

Don't know much about this bakery, but many tiny businesses get sued and settle the case without going out of business. They probably will never make that mistake again, but they don't go out of business. I sued a small management company that screwed me over. They paid via settlement and continue to run their practice.

I don't think a lawsuit or settlement is going to force these people to make the cake against their will.

I think there's a case for PUBLIC companies like MacDonald's to be required to serve the PUBLIC. That would be the corporation, its subsidiaries, its franchisees, and so on. By PUBLIC, I mean they're traded on the stock market. They get PUBLIC benefits beyond what we pay taxes for (liability protection, etc.).

At least these people didn't make the cake and put Ex-lax (or worse) in it. You know, like all the restaurants in La Pine do to MARIS61.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I don't think a lawsuit or settlement is going to force these people to make the cake against their will.

I think there's a case for PUBLIC companies like MacDonald's to be required to serve the PUBLIC. That would be the corporation, its subsidiaries, its franchisees, and so on. By PUBLIC, I mean they're traded on the stock market. They get PUBLIC benefits beyond what we pay taxes for (liability protection, etc.).

At least these people didn't make the cake and put Ex-lax (or worse) in it. You know, like all the restaurants in La Pine do to MARIS61.

So the bakery ends up paying an attorney and paying money to make the lawsuit go away. next time a gay couple asks to have a cake made, you think the bakery will say no we don't make cakes for gay people?

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

No one is being forced to change their religious views. They are being "forced" to follow secular law. Like every citizen and resident of these United States. A bakery is not a church. The couple is being neither petty nor stupid. Any more than I was being petty and stupid when I said the place where I worked needed to follow the law.

Cool. Agree to disagree. It's ruh-tarded IMO. It's also ruh-tarded they were refused a wedding cake.

Big distinction, though: they were refused a wedding cake. NOT service.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Seriously.

Fuck the baker.

Fuck the lesbian couple.

They're both stupid.

It should 100% be the bakers right not to make a cake for anyone for any reason.

Exactly what I've been saying. Albeit in different words.

 

[Denny Crane]

So the bakery ends up paying an attorney and paying money to make the lawsuit go away. next time a gay couple asks to have a cake made, you think the bakery will say no we don't make cakes for gay people?

The bakery may end up paying money to make it go away. Maybe not. We'll see, eh? They're certainly not going to make the cake. And when a 2nd gay couple comes in, they won't then.

Like I said, you putting these people out of business is a brutal punishment beyond what fits the crime.

And yeah, I think it's re-tarded, too, to not sell them the cake.

I'd prefer the publicity convinces the masses to patronize some other business and they go out of business by their own doing.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

The bakery may end up paying money to make it go away. Maybe not. We'll see, eh? They're certainly not going to make the cake. And when a 2nd gay couple comes in, they won't then.

Like I said, you putting these people out of business is a brutal punishment beyond what fits the crime.

And yeah, I think it's re-tarded, too, to not sell them the cake.

I'd prefer the publicity convinces the masses to patronize some other business and they go out of business by their own doing.

I have no idea if the bakery will settle or not. But I disagree with you about the second couple. If the bakery loses or settles this lawsuit for something other than a nominal settlement, when a second gay couple comes to their business, they will make the cake or at least not say they won't make the cake because the couple is gay.

Assuming they are smart business people.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

I did not say they said they hate gays; I said First Amendment says they have the legal right to say that but not to treat gay couples differently. The law in question is state anti discrimination law that forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation.

the First in a nut shell

Your rights to Freedom of Religion and the free exercise thereof means:
•The Freedom of Religion is an inalienable right.
•The First Amendment provides for the Freedom of Religion for all Americans.
•The Free Exercise Clause provides that government will neither control nor prohibit the free exercise of one’s religion.
•The government will remain neutral

I dont believe that those of us that do not agree with how this couple acted, have the right to force them to do something aginst their religous beliefs.