Judge Finds Christian Bakers Guilty for Refusing to Bake ‘Gay’ Cake, Fines May Bankrupt Business

KleinGRESHAM, Ore. — A judge with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries has ruled that the Christian owners of a bakery in the state are guilty of discrimination for declining to make a “wedding” cake for a lesbian couple, thus moving them to the sentencing phase where heavy fines could bankrupt their business.

Spokesman Charlie Burr wrote in a statement on Monday that the bakers, which regularly serve homosexuals, could not use their religious beliefs as a reason to refuse the order because a business is not considered a “religious institution.”

“The law provides an exemption for religious organizations and schools, but does not allow private businesses to discriminate based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot legally deny service based on race, sex, age, disability or religion,” he said. “The bakery is not a religious institution under the law.”

As previously reported, Aaron and Melissa Klein operate Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Gresham, which is now operated from the couple’s home after the Kleins’ shut their doors due to harassment. In January 2013, Aaron was approached by a mother and her daughter as the two were interested in a cake for the daughter’s upcoming wedding—to her lesbian partner.

“My first question was what’s the wedding date,” Klein told television station KTW in Portland. “My next question was [the] bride and groom’s name. … The girl giggled a little bit and said, ‘It’s two brides.’”

He stated that he then informed the women that the bakery does not make cakes for homosexual events.

“I apologized for wasting their time and said that unfortunately, we do not do same-sex marriages,” Klein explained.

  • Connect with Christian News

The women then left Sweet Cakes upset about the incident, and later, one of them filed a complaint with the state. The Oregon Attorney General’s office soon launched an investigation against the Klein’s as the state’s non-discrimination laws prevent public accommodations from being denied to any individual on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex [or] sexual orientation.”

But Klein states that he regularly serves homosexuals. He believes that there is a difference between serving homosexuals in general, and having to personally facilitate same-sex ceremonies, which is an act of participation.

“I have customers come in almost on a weekly basis that are homosexual,” he said. “They can buy my stuff. I sell stuff. I talk with them. That’s fine. … This was not the first time we’ve served these girls.”

“We were being asked to participate in something that we could not participate in,” Klein’s wife, Melissa, noted.

The couple expressed concern last October that if they were indeed forced to pay a fine for declining the cake over their Christian convictions, the penalty would “definitely” bankrupt the family. Reports on the amount of the fine differ, ranging from $75,000 to $150,000.

Now, following a guilty verdict from the Bureau of Labor and Industries, the ruling will move the case into the penalty phase. A hearing is set for March 10 to determine the damages.

“The entire time, I felt the law was very much on our side because the law is black and white,” attorney Paul Thompson, who represented the lesbian women, told OregonLive following the decision.

But Anna Harmon, who represented the Kleins, said that the ruling was “wrong and dangerous.”

“Americans should not have to choose between adhering to their faith or closing their business,” she said, “but that is what this decision means.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Gary

    Declare bankruptcy. Move. Open another bakery. When homosexuals want a wedding cake, bake it. Use salt instead of sugar.

    • NATHAN AMAL

      and then go to jail-that’s smart, dumdum. God will not be mocked

      • Gary

        I don’t think they would go to jail for that. Offer them their money back. You have to find some way to make the kwiers not want to do business with you without violating the law.

  • jr

    i do not understand if it is against ur religous beliefs it is ur right not iscrimnation because of skin color

    • NATHAN AMAL

      God does not want any hatred and He will punish all who discriminates in His name

      • http://www.joseph-a-nagy-jr.us Joseph A. Nagy, Jr

        You are a troll and seriously deluded if you think homosexuals are ‘God’s people.”

      • Harry Oh!

        Just think about how ridicules you sound.

        • theodore22

          What’s the ridiculous part? Oh does God hate certain people? I’m confused.

      • Gary

        God discriminates against homosexuals, and He instructs his people to discriminate against them too. Ephesians 5:11

  • thara43

    You think this is bad, just wait til the Supreme
    court makes gay marriage the law of the land….The homosexual community will be coming against
    every thing that gets in their way.

    • NATHAN AMAL

      Yes, God’s chosen people are the gays-He will not stop until they have full equality.

      • Gary

        Prove it.

    • Oshtur

      You do realize this has nothing to do with the civil contract of marriage, right? This happened long before marriage equality in Oregon.

    • MarkT.

      When that happens, people in their respective state can try to get their legislature to do away with all mention of marriage in their laws. No reason for the state to be involved in marriage in the first place. To the state, it really is just a contract

      between two persons, so just drop the term marriage from them, and have people just sign a simple contact (with no mention of marriage on it) and file it with the state if need be. God does not need to see some paperwork (license) from the government to know if you are married or not. And if you want a divorce, both of you can get the contact, that was filed with the state, back and rip it up.

      • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

        Yeah. They’ll get right on that — just for you.

        • MarkT.

          The people do have the right to bypass their state legislature and state courts and go right to the people by way of a constitutional amendment to their state constitution. The majority of people in the state of Ohio did that to say that marriage was only between a man and a woman. If the U.S. Supreme Court strikes that down, the people can vote on another constitution amendment to strike all mention of marriage from the state laws.

          • Oshtur

            Mark I don’t think you understand what the civil contract of marriage does. It is like an adoption contract in that it creates a legally recognized familial relationship, that of spouse. Once that is created it is independent of the contract, that’s why your plan won’t work. Rip up the contract all you want the familial relationship exist until dissolved by a family court.

            Now many European states have secular civil unions that do this and people have an additional religious marriage if they want which could work. Problem is people are more united in opposing this than are against marriage equality.

          • MarkT.

            It was just a thought, so disregard my mention of a written contact then. God never required a man and a woman to get a license (permission) from the state to get married. I don’t think any of the 613 old testament laws mentioned needing a piece of paper either.

          • Oshtur

            Without a legally recognized familial relationship the Government will not be able to treat husband-and-wife any differently than two people on the street. No automatic inheritance rights, no special treatments and so I don’t think that is what you really want.

          • MarkT.

            I’m okay with that, we don’t need it. Why should they get special treatment over single people.

          • Oshtur

            Yeah right. Have fun selling that.

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      I sure hope we DO come after everything that gets in our way. Don’t like it? STEP ASIDE.

      Cuz see, here’z the thing: if we get our way, it actually won’t impact YOUR life other than having to live knowing that there are people out there who disagree with you. There was never any reason for you to be in the way in the first place other than your own selfishness.

  • NATHAN AMAL

    This is God’s punishment for bigotry in His name-He will not allow these nasty backwards hicks to justify hatred by using His word. Deep shame on them. Hopefully they will learn not to hate before they jeopardize the lives of their children’s future.

    • http://www.joseph-a-nagy-jr.us Joseph A. Nagy, Jr

      No one here is hating anyone.

      • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

        What comment section are YOU reading? *raised eyebrow*

        • http://www.joseph-a-nagy-jr.us Joseph A. Nagy, Jr

          Your definition of hate is skewed.

    • Jack the Baptizer

      People sin, and God does hate sin. Agreeing with God about what he calls a sin is not hateful. God judges the wicked and Christians do their best to avoid taking part in the sin of others. To call that hate is to assume that not contributnig to the practices of others is hateful, in which case homosexual couples asking for wedding services from Christians is hateful.

    • Gary

      God does not punish people for bigotry against perverts.

  • Oshtur

    “Americans should not have to choose between adhering to their faith or closing their business…”

    They don’t. It is the business with the obligation to not illegally discriminate, not at any particular individual. The business can:

    • MarkT.

      You will notice that they have not tried this with any Muslim owned bakery, that I am aware of anyway. I’m sure there must be some Muslim owned ones here in the USA.

      • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

        “Tried” what exactly? To get served in accordance with the law? Muslim and Jewish bakeries don’t give a rodent’s rear what anyone does with a cake once it is sold. It’s a business. What part of that do you not get?

      • Oshtur

        The Muslim-owned business don’t discriminate. Local Muslim caterer is happy to do weddings regardless of the sexes of the couple.

  • Harry Oh!

    America is finished. The fact that this topic is even up for debate shows just how far from truth, morality and common sense we have fallen.

    • Fundisi

      So sad, but absolutely true. Our offical State Church is Secular Humanism/Atheism and a key doctrine is sexual debauchery and moral dissipation.

    • Jeff T

      You’re right, it’s not because corrupt politicians and big corporations are ruining this country.

      It’s them damn faggots.

      Get an education lol.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      “America is finished.”

      Thank you, Chicken Little.

  • TheBBP

    This is a war against Christian businesses. I think that we should en masse test the tolerance of pro-homosexual bakeries and order Biblical Marriage-themed cakes with anti-gay marriage agendas on them to see how well it is tolerated.

    • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

      Oh please. What on earth is a “Christian business” anyway? These people slather butter-cream over sponge cake — not exactly God’s work. This is a business. It is also a public accommodation that is required to comply with anti-discrimination ordinances. Don’t like the law? Vote in people who will change it.

    • Oshtur

      what is a biblical marriage themed cake? And, of course, if the business doesn’t put ‘anti-‘ messages on their products at all they won’t have to on this one.

      In contrast the cakes pictured on this businesses webpage showed cakes that could be used for weddings regardless of the sexes of the happy couple.

    • theodore22

      No one is at war with Christian anything. If Jesus were alive today he would have made the cake, I assure you.

      • Fundisi

        Prove it!

        • theodore22

          uhhh Jesus only lives in my heart…therefore he cannot makes cakes…therefore this is impossible to prove. Just like proving homosexuality is a sin.

          • Douglas

            The Bible plainly states that it is a sin. How can you follow Jesus but not believe what is written in the Bible? (rhetorical question)

          • Fundisi

            Because they are NOT Christians Douglas, they say they are, but they will not obey God and they hate Christians that do.

          • theodore22

            Uhh because Jesus never said it was sin. Check the bible that you seem to follow. Do you eat pork? eat shellfish? are you fat? do you ever wear torn jeans?Do you wear cotton shirts? If you answer yes to any of these you also don’t follow the bible.

          • theodore22

            here’s a nice passage:
            1 Cor. 6:9-10, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God
            from most weddings I go to…people get pretty drunk. So she shouldn’t sell a cake to any couple.

          • layo jaiyesimi

            You first of all stated that it couldnt be proved that homosexuality is a sin….then you go and quote a scripture that clearly states that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of heaven !!! What’s your point here ???

          • theodore22

            My point is if you’re going to deny homosexuals than you have to deny everyone else I mentioned. Why focus on just homosexuals? Why can no one ever answer that question? And because something is in the bible does not make it “proof”. The pope would even agree with that.

          • layo jaiyesimi

            Everyone else you mentioned is forbidden from inheriting the kingdom of God along with gays. The focus of this discussion is on them only cos that’s what the story is about..not cos God hates their lifestyle more than he hates others. As for your remark that the bible is not “proof” of anything..Im not going there with you,mate..you either believe the book or you dont..

          • Gary

            The proof that homosexuality is a sin is clearly written in the Bible.

          • theodore22

            as is eating pork, eating shellfish, getting fat, I can go on and on. Why you guys seem to focus on that one subject is beyond me. Divorce is ten times worse in the bible yet I never see you guys protest a divorce court.

          • Gary

            All of your efforts to justify homosexuality, or to change the subject won’t work.

          • theodore22

            I’m not trying to justify homosexuality. I’m not God. My point is if you think it’s such a sin why don’t you think all those other things are sins. I never see a picket line at divorce court. You guys can never answer that. ever.

          • layo jaiyesimi

            perhaps..perhaps ,sir,..because Divorcees take full responsibilty for their actions and dont go about whining that God made them do it

          • Fundisi

            Lies! They did not refuse to make or sell a cake, even a wedding cake, even to gays, they simply refused to compromise their faith and participate in an immoral false Lesbian Marriage by decorating it.

          • Taussig

            again with the lies…wow. you are no christian by your own standards. sad that you have to lower yourself this way

          • Fundisi

            If I am wrong and it is an error, I will admit it, I am not perfect, I can make mistakes, but I am not a liberal, so I don’t lie. I recall the story when it originally came out and arguing it on another blog and I usually stick with the first version, it is usually the truth; and with lawyers and liberals, like there is any difference, they can twist facts so much and pressure their clients to distort the truth. So, until proven wrong, I will stick with the original story.

          • Badkey

            Decorations were never discussed. You are lying.

      • Gary

        Not a chance. God condemns all homosexuals.

        • Spoob

          That’s stupid and incorrect, and you are not God.

  • Jonnie

    What ever happened to appeal? There’s ACLJ, Liberty Counsel, Rutherford Institute, among others. Go that route

  • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

    Makes perfect sense to me. Figure out who gets a cake by where and how it will be consumed. Sure. And these folks figure out who is divorced and getting remarried right? And they ask about each bride’s virginity, right? Please. http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/2015/02/its-act-ii-for-kleins-and-sweet-cakes.html

    • Fundisi

      These people made it know it was for a Lesbian Wedding, the owners did NOT ask them.

  • Damselindistress

    Why don’t these lesbians go to a “gay-friendly’ bakery? This surely isn’t the only bakery in town? They are mean-spirited women wanting to bankrupt a family business just to make their ridiculous point. Why are the gays now the norm and the rest of us must cow-tow to them? What has happened to this country? Jesus come soon.

    • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

      Really? That’s your answer? They should shop around to find out who won’t say “we don’t serve your kind here?” That is precisely why we have non-discrimination laws in the first place.

      • Jean Adams

        Those who asked for a wedding cake were regular customers of the bakery. The bakery had no problem with them being lesbians, as others sins are no concern of Christians who have their own. What the bakery objected to was providing a cake for a “wedding” which as Christians they cannot be a part of. Even by providing a cake.

        • Oshtur

          Then the business should have had someone else make it. And your excuse is no different than the restaurant owner saying he served blacks just not at the lunch counter.

          The law requires full access to all services.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Then no doubt when an opposite-gender couple came in asking for a wedding cake, the bakers inquired to make sure that neither of the couple had been divorced for reasons other infidelity, because if they had been, then making a cake for their nuptials would be participating in an event that the Bible says is wrong.

          They did inquire about that, right? Because they say that participating in an event that is at odds with their Biblical beliefs is something they can’t do. So surely they are asking, right? Probably also when someone asks about a cake for an engagement party, they make sure the couple isn’t having sexual relations, as they wouldn’t want to be involving themselves in celebrating that relationship. They probably also ask, when a baby shower cake is requested, if the mother is married.

          Of course they do. Because if they didn’t, then this whole “it’s against my religious beliefs” is just a crock and they are hypocrites.

        • Oshtur

          The Corinth Christians could sell to ‘those of this world’ things that would end up in actual pagan rituals and on pagan altars, how is a cake for a celebration not even part of a ritual not allowed?

    • Michael

      Go back 50 years and you could replace “gay marriage” with “interracial marriage.” Think about how the argument sounds now. “Why not go to a colored-friendly bakery?” Why not ask God if displaying His love looks like refusing to serve? If one’s job as a baker is to only serve the righteous, then that doesn’t really sound like Jesus. Sounds more like the other guys. “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.” -Ephesians 4:32. I don’t think the issue is black and white, but our jobs as Christians certainly isn’t to selectively treat people differently based on their level of sin.

      • Fundisi

        An immutable characteristic like skin color and sexual immorality are not comparable. They cannot be forced to participate in a sinful affair by being made to decorate that cake with something that violates their faith.

        • dark477

          They can actually and have.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “They cannot be forced to participate in a sinful affair by being made to decorate that cake with something that violates their faith.”

          Absolutely correct. They cannot be forced. They are free to choose to discontinue offering wedding cakes or to close their business. They cannot be “forced” to decorate a cake.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          No, they are not being “forced”, as clearly is shown by the fact that they did not make the cake.

          They are free not to open a business, just as they are free to decide that wedding cakes will not be part of what they offer. They are not being “forced”.

          • Fundisi

            The price of refusing is to lose their business, so the attempt to force them exists and your side, the anti-Christ side will destroy them for refusing.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “The price of refusing is to lose their business”

            No, it’s not. They are free to modify what the offer and to no longer offer wedding cakes.

            “the anti-Christ side will destroy them for refusing.”

            Oh, please. Spare me the histrionics. No one is being “destroyed”.

      • Faithwalker

        No you cannot not replace sexuality with the civil rights struggle of the black race. Contrasting race and sexuality are two polar opposites. People cannot change their race, but they can certainly change their sexual orientation.

        • Fundisi

          Exactly right! It is a false argument and even many black people refuse to accept this as a civil rights issue.

          • Faithwalker

            I for one refuse to accept that argument.

        • Josh

          Good luck with changing your sexual orientation. If you’re not attracted to a certain gender, how can you make the decision to be attracted to it?

          • Faithwalker

            Galatians 5:17
            For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want

            Romans 8:5
            Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires

        • Michael

          I’m not saying gays have had to suffer equally as much as blacks, not at all. I’m taking about the state of peoples’ hearts on this issue. The level of disdain and anti-gay speech is shocking and frankly rather ignorant. There are certain stereotypes I see people attributing to gays in general, perpetuating malice and hate toward homosexuals as a whole, writing off individuals as people Jesus loves and died for and labeling them with whatever makes it easier to write them off. What I meant by comparing it to interracial marriage was not the legal struggle, but the social struggle. There were people who thought that interracial marriage was disgusting, unrighteous and shouldn’t be allowed. I’m not saying the two are perfect comparisons, but we should examine our hearts and make certain we’re not spreading hate or fear and instead work on truly loving these misguided children of God, for “they know not what they do.” I think whether or not it’s a choice is a hotly debated subject, and being myself a hetero male I can’t say I choose to be straight, but I don’t know what it’s like to be gay, or what kinds of strongholds rule the life of that person. Personally I don’t like the idea of not baking a cake for someone’s “wedding.” Jesus told us to bless our enemies. It’s an active process that sometimes goes against or natural instinct. Homophobia isn’t a holy fear. There is no holy fear save the fear of the Lord. Not baking a cake isn’t going to stop gay marriage nor is it going to convey love for them. But those are just my thoughts. I’m not judging the baker as I’m sure he was doing what he thought was good and right, and that’s between him and God.

        • dark477

          Every legitimate mental health organization says otherwise.

        • Jeff T

          The fact that you think that sexual orientation can be changed is proof that you have zero understanding of what sexual orientation is on a psychological level.

          If you don’t know what you’re talking about then don’t talk at all.

          • Faithwalker

            Well actually bright guy you evidently haven’t been reading any articles of the people who have come out of that lifestyle. Christian news posted a couple of articles of people reversing their sexuality from LBGT to straight. Check out Christian news article from the other day on a reversal. So before you decide to try to demean someone, conduct your research first.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Choosing not to act on your orientation is vastly different than actually changing your orientation. If changing sexual orientation is something that people can simply decide to do, then it would be reasonable to say that you could simply decide to start being romantically and sexually attracted to someone of the same gender. Can you HONESTLY say you could do that?

        • Spoob

          People can change their sexuality? Is that why Exidus International closed their doors, admitted they were fraudulent and apologized?

          You CANNOT change sexual orientation. Check the website for apa.org.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “Comparing race and sexuality are two polar opposites.”

          No one is comparing race to sexuality – although they are not “polar opposites”. The comparison is to the struggle to be treated equally under the law and to not be subject to discrimination based upon a trait.

          “but they can certainly change their sexual orientation.”

          Well this is certainly news. Where did you come up with that? So you could just decide today to change your sexual orientation and be sexually and romantically attracted to someone of the same gender?

      • Garrett

        Jude 1:4. Look it up and then reread the whole chapter.

        • Oshtur

          There is nothing immoral about being gay, Christians marry just fine gay or straight

          • Garrett

            There also wasn’t anything immoral about Sodom and Gomorrah…at least in their own eyes. Now, God on the other hand. He apparently thought there was enough immoral activity to destroy both cities. And He doesn’t change with the times.

          • Oshtur

            The way the people of those towns treated poor travelers and those that took mercy on them was horrific but even the Republicans with tgeir immigration policies aren’t nearly that bad yet.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            More accurately – what you have CHOSEN to believe what God thinks. Unless you are God, you do not know for certain what he thinks. Are you God, Garrett?

          • Spoob

            Wish I could give that comment about 10 thumbs up. AMEN!

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Thanks!

          • Garrett

            Am I God? No. But do I know what His word says? Yes. And as such, according to what I HAVE CHOSEN TO BELIEVE, I am certain, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that this is what He thinks.

            Do you profess to know Him?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “But do I know what His word says? Yes. ”

            You can’t possibly know that for certain unless you are God. You have chosen to believe that the Bible contains God’s word.

            You are free to be certain in your belief, but your being certain does not make your belief definitively true.

            No, I do not profess to know God, as I have never met him. I do, however, profess to have a strong belief in God, to believe that I see God in everything around me, to believe that I have a relationship with God, and believe that I witness his involvement and influence in my life every single day.

          • Garrett

            Even the demons believe bro. But believe as you please. I just wish that with the apparent certainty of your beliefs, you would put yourself in the column of acting on them. Evangelism, discipleship, teaching others. Me? I believe that it’s just as important to know God, and then MAKE Him known.

            On the other side of the coin, I really hope that you are truly saved by Christ.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I do act on my beliefs.

    • The Last Trump

      Because “gay” and “friendly” places don’t seem to actually exist anywhere. Might have something to do with their extreme hate and intolerance for anyone who commits the “crime” of supporting traditional marriage. Would have made great Nazis.

      • Spoob

        Why is it that you bigots always use “supporting traditional marriage” as a code phrase for “opposing gay marriage”? Can’t you just speak honestly about what you want? You aren’t “supporting” anything, you are tearing down.

    • dark477

      Or they could go to any bakery and expect good service because they’re paying customers.

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      Why don’t these homophobes just bake the frickin’ cake? They are mean-spirited bigots wanting to condemn a growing family just to make their ridiculous point. Why are religious people the norm and the rest of us must cow-tow to them? What happened to this world? Jesus not even breathing hard yet.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      Yeah! And why can’t those darkies go to “black-friendly” bakery! And the Jews – why can’t they go to a “jew-friendly” bakery. And the Whops – why can’t they go to an “italian-friendly” bakery?

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      You got that right, Damsel! Just like those darkies – why can’t they just go to “black-friendly” businesses? Or those Japs – why can’t they just go to “Japanese-friendly” businesses. Or those Jews – why can’t they just go to “Jew-friendly” businesses?

      Man….people expecting businesses to follow the law when they don’t want to. Unbelievable!

  • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

    By the way there is a simple solution. Post a sign on the door saying that you disapprove of same-sex marriage. I can assure you that the gay community won’t reward you with our money. It’s perfectly legal.

    They don’t do that because they know that it will alienate more than just the LGBT community. They sure have religious zeal. Real economic courage.

  • Gary

    If we want to be in business, then we need to find a way to make the homosexuals and their enablers not want to do business with us. Be creative.

    • Taussig

      go for it….lets see what youve got

  • Fundisi

    The 1st Amendment should protect this baker, there is nothing therein that prohibits in any shape, manner or form or would inhibit a Christian from expressing their religious faith in the conduct of their business. In fact the State is prohibited from passing any such laws. What went wrong? Liberalism, godless, Christ hating completely immoral liberalism and cowardly conservatives more interested in elections and making money than standing up for the Constitution. Let us at least be honest liberals, move for an amendment to kill the first clause of the First Amendment once and for all and stop the pretense, stop pretending you care for liberty and the rights of man; you are only concerned with serving your father in hell and enjoying your lusts as long as you can.

    Now Christians, pray earnestly that God will make it up to this baker many times what they have lost. Stand against godless liberalism and for Christ, stand for God’s Word or you too will fall for anything.

    • Oshtur

      “respondents argue that the Smith neutrality test should not be applied here for two reasons. First, this is a “hybrid” case in which the law “substantially burdens multiple rights combining religion in speech” that the Smith court distinguished from cases it only involves free-speech exercise claims. This argument fails because neither respondents free exercise nor free-speech claims are independently viable and the two claims together or not greater than the sum of their parts. Second, respondents argue that ORS 659A.403 is neither “neutral” nor of “general applicability.” Applying the Smith test, the forum finds that the ORS 659A.403 is a “valid a neutral law of general applicability” as such, it is a constitutional under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause, both facially and as applied.

      “Based on the discussion in the previous section, the form concludes that the requirement in ORS 659A.403 that respondents bake a wedding cake for complainants is not “a compelled speech” that violates the free-speech clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

      • Fundisi

        Yes, the Courts have perverted the 1st Amendment, we all know that. Religious expression is not limited to exclude the workplace or a business. Yes, we know the liberal courts are anti-Christ and are at war with the Church and ignoring the Constitution.

        • Oshtur

          Been the law of the land probably longer than you’ve been alive.

          • Fundisi

            No it has NOT! Read the 1st Amendment, it does not restrict religious expression from a workplace or business and it says the State may pass no laws to force them and thus no legislation by the courts that infringe on those rights.

          • Oshtur

            Exactly! And the rights that are being discriminated against here are the customers. They are the ones who believe in same-sex marriage and accepted the freely made offered by the business to sell them a wedding cake. If the business won’t sell something to people of all beliefs they shouldn’t be offering it to the general public because their right to religious freedom protects them from religious discrimination of this type.

          • Fundisi

            Homosexuality and gay marriage is not an established religion, it is a perversion of the Christian faith and a violation of this business owner’s right not to participate in their sin.

          • Oshtur

            But many beliefs include marriage equality, obviously these customers did.

          • Jean Adams

            Perhaps all bakers should stop making wedding cake and all hotels should remove double beds and install twin beds. This would ensure they would not be complicit in sin. This would be a sad day but would keep them in business.

          • Oshtur

            That is one legal solution. Nothing sad about it, if the business owner is driven to religiously discriminate the onus is on them to do so in a legal manner.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            ” it does not restrict religious expression from a workplace or business ”

            Nor does it grant it.

            “and it says the State may pass no laws to force them”

            No law has been passed which “forces” them to. Owning a business is a choice. The type of products a business offers is a choice. No one is “forced”.

            “thus no legislation by the courts”

            The courts don’t legislate.

            You would benefit from a better understanding of both our constitution as well as our system of law and justice. Your inaccurate beliefs do not serve you well.

          • Fundisi

            To say my understanding of the Constitution and our system of law and justice is flawed, is your subjective, hate filled opinion, not fact.

            If any law says that a Christian owned business must participate in a wicked ceremony or not be allowed to own a business, is a violation of the 1st Amendment and no perversion of our liberal, anti-Christ justice system can ever change that fact.

          • Oshtur

            Selling a cake isn’t participating anymore than the Corinthian Christians selling meats and fruits to customers they knew were taking it to a temple altar were. Christians are free to do business with people of this world.

          • Fundisi

            So German Christians were free to make and sell gas chambers and weapons to Hitler, even if they believed he would use them to exterminate the Jews and take over the world?

            If a Christian believes in his heart that doing something is a sin and he does it anyway, to him it is a sin before God, even if God does not specifically call the thing a sin, it is sin because it is rebellion against what they believe in their heart’s is against God’s Will. If they believe eating meat offered to idols is a sin, if they eat thereof, even though God does not call it a sin, they are guilty of sin; and, further if any Christian, like you, eats meat sacrificed to idols to their knowledge and cause them to do likewise – which is exactly what you are doing, the Christian brother eating that meat is guilty of sin against their brother. So, if, whether you, someone I do not consider a Christian at all, says it is a sin or not; and by force of law you want to force them to violate their faith – you have sinned against them and you will answer to God.

            To do business with sinners is not prohibited, but if in doing business you participate in their sin, knowingly sell them meat to sacrifice to idols, as was your example, they are guilty of sin. If they believe selling a wedding cake for a Lesbian wedding is a sin and that it causes them to participate in that sin, for them it is a sin. But, you do not care about their souls or their desire to please God, you say they must obey you and this wicked world or they should not be allowed to operate a business and thus you are sinning against them.

          • Oshtur

            Foolish examples – would they sell that equipment to anyone? No? Then there is no discrimination. And of course no one at the business was invited to the wedding ceremony, the wedding, or the reception party afterwards – they are no more participating in any of it than the guy who sold me my dinner rolls is at my dinner party.

            And if the business thought selling to customers of some beliefs was a sin they wouldn’t have offered the item for sale to the general public that included members with those beliefs.

            They must obey no one, this is about obeying the law, a law they knew before they offered a single item for sale. They can no more religiously discriminate against a prospective customer from the general public than they can a prospective employee.

            Don’t offer things for sale to the general public you can’t sell to people of all beliefs is the lesson here.

          • Fundisi

            Wrong, they must obey God!

            If they knowingly sell something that will be used to promote wickedness, they are guilty of sin. If they do not know how it would be used, they are not guilty of sin. The Lesbians made it clear it was for use in a wicked ceremony, a ceremony that serves Satan.

            To make it available to the public does not imply for any use. We Christians are to obey God and not man.

          • Oshtur

            Wrong. God said we can do business with people of this world, their sins are between them and Him. Unless selling a cake is a sin no sin is committed.

          • Fundisi

            Selling a cake is not a sin, knowingly selling a cake dedicated to a ceremony instituted by Satan is a sin. It is proof that you are no Christian that you would defend homosexuality and gay marriage and stand against people of faith in this matter. No Christian would say that selling things for evil purposes is not a sin.

          • Oshtur

            No bible believing Christian thinks selling something to someone is a sin. God said it was alright and specifically said any sins of those of this world are between Him and them. Usurp His claimed right of Judgement at your peril.

            And even if they erroneously think it is a sin the solution is simple and obvious – don’t offer wedding cakes for sale to those of this world.

            They make sinful offers and then complain when they are taken up on them. Hypocrites.

          • Fundisi

            You just keep proving you are no Christian.

            Christians are called to make righteous judgments, “II Corinthians 6: “14 not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?”

            “the Bible also exhorts us to beware of evildoers and false prophets and to avoid those who practice all kinds of evil. How are we to discern who these people are if we do not make some kind of judgment about them? Christians are often accused of “judging” whenever they speak out against a sinful activity. However, that is not the meaning of the Scripture verses that state, “Do not judge.” There is a righteous kind of judgment we are supposed to exercise—with careful discernment” (John 7:24).

            ___________________________________________
            “No bible believing Christian thinks selling something to someone is a sin.”

            Prove that all-inclusive statement! Then show us exactly from God’s Word where you are getting that doctrine so we can debate what it means.

            ___________________________________________

            They agreed to sell wedding cakes, they did not agree to sell them with pornographic images, or racist images or child molestation images, they had every right under our Constitution to say no, that order crosses the line in forcing me to sell something for immoral, wicked purposes in violation of my faith.
            ___________________________________________

            They did not make any sinful offers, that is false.

          • Oshtur

            You are a contradictory mess. First you are asserting that Christians shouldnt contract with unbelievers “yoking” and then you say that the business publicly offering to do just that isn’t a sin!! Then you as so many here start blathering about things the business won’t sell to anyone and compare it to this situation where the customer just wants what the last customer could have gotten.

            I don’t know if it is just being willful obtuse, just genuine weak minded, or just old fashioned demonic deceit but it happens too often to be by chance.

          • Fundisi

            Thank you for the compliment, they accused my Lord of having a demon as well.

            I see you did not provide that scriptural reference I requested.

            “First you are asserting that Christians shouldn’t contract with
            unbelievers “yoking” and then you say that the business publicly
            offering to do just that isn’t a sin!!”

            Try quoting me directly to prove your lying accusations please.

            You are deliberately, wickedly obtuse, because you are desperate to defend homosexuality, Lesbianism and gay marriage an dexpress your hatred for Christians that stand up against sinb, I can only assume you must be gay?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “To say my understanding of the Constitution and our system of law and justice is flawed, is your subjective, hate filled opinion, not fact.”

            Please point to the portion of my comment that you believe was “hate-filled”.

            Actually, it is fact. You are factually incorrect that legislation cannot be passed which places restrictions on the expression of religious beliefs. It can. You are factually incorrect that judges legislate. They do not. You are factually incorrect that the 1st amendment states that no law may be passed which infringes upon religious expression. It does not.

          • Fundisi

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;. . .”

            They are prohibited to make any law which infringes on religious expression, they are forbidden by the Constitution.

            When the Courts make judgments that in fact infringe of religious expression, they are legislating from the bench, they are violating the Constitution.

            Your every word is hateful of people of faith, you defend perverting the 1st Amendment, because you are hateful of Christians.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “They are prohibited to make any law which infringes on religious expression, they are forbidden by the Constitution.”

            No, they are, as the 1st amendment clearly states, prohibiting from making any laws which “PROHIBIT” religious expression. “Prohibiting” and “infringing” are two different things. Some examples: a church is not allowed to ring bells for service prior to a certain time in the morning. You are not allowed to go out into the street in your neighborhood at 3 am and start shouting about your faith. You are not allowed to sacrifice animals as a part of your faith. You are not allowed to stand up in the middle of a theater and start expressing your faith. There are a variety of restrictions which quite legally “infringe” upon your freedom of expression.

            “When the Courts make judgments that in fact infringe of religious expression, they are legislating from the bench, they are violating the Constitution.”

            “Legislating” can only be done by legislative bodies, not by the judiciary.

            “Your every word is hateful of people of faith, you defend perverting the 1st Amendment, because you are hateful of Christians.”

            I am most certainly not “hateful” of Christians. In fact, I don’t hate anyone. The majority of my friends and family belong to the Christian faith. Much good has been done in this world by people who were/are motivated by their faith. Nor do I defend perverting the 1st amendment. Your statement is simply false.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      “The 1st Amendment should protect this baker, there is nothing therein that prohibits in any shape, manner or form or would inhibit a Christian from expressing their religious faith in the conduct of their business. ”

      Correct. Those prohibitions are not in the 1st amendment. They are in anti-discrimination laws.

      “In fact the State is prohibited from passing any such laws.”

      Based upon what? The 1st amendment does not provide a guarantee that people are able to express their religious belief in any way, at any time, and at any place they care to. It provides only the protection that laws will not be passed which PROHIBIT religious expression.

      “Let us at least be honest liberals, move for an amendment to kill the first clause of the First Amendment once and for all and stop the pretense”

      Toward what end?

      • Fundisi

        “Correct. Those prohibitions are not in the 1st amendment. They are in anti-discrimination laws.”

        The congress in the Bill of Rights is PROHIBITED from passing any laws that in any way, shape, manner or form infringe upon the rights of religious expression. To say a Christian in business must serve people that violate his faith, especially ones that makes them a participant in those things is an infringement on that right.

        “To what end?”

        As you folk want to force Christians to violate their faith if they are in business, you have made the 1st Amendment null and void, and honesty demands you simply seek to remove that clause from the 1st Amendment, because you are anti-Christian. At last be honest!

        • Oshtur

          The invitation to do business was free made. And the First Amendment protects both anyone at the business and the customer. So the courts will look at who invited who whom do business? The answer to this question is why every single one of these cases as cited for the customer even in the most conservative states.

          Don’t make an indication of sale to the general public if you are willing to sell things to people of all the leaves. Their right to religious freedom protects them from after-the-fact religious discrimination.

          • Fundisi

            I doubt the business said it would be willing to participate in wicked gay weddings by providing products that support such wickedness.

            To force the business owner to participate in such sin is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment and no other laws may be passed that in any way infringe on that right.

          • Oshtur
          • Fundisi

            To knowingly sell that cake for a wicked ceremony is to participate in that wickedness.

            The business knowing they were inviting everyone, does not imply they were willing to make a product for a wicked act.

            To you a Christian making gas chambers for Hitler was approved by God.

            You are accusing the Christian baker of licentiousness for refusing to sell that cake?

          • Oshtur

            We know even God doesn’t think that, the Corinth Christians were free to do business with people in town for the purpose of pagan ritual, they were free to sell to temple workers, and much of their efforts rnded up on pagan altars.

            But that is the real issue – the rise of the pseudo Christians that are puffed up in their self-righteousness. If these are the end times the adversaries will be at mega churches calling themselves Christian

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “The congress in the Bill of Rights is PROHIBITED from passing any laws that in any way, shape, manner or form infringe upon the rights of religious expression.”

          You are incorrect. That prohibition does not appear anywhere in the constitution. The wording in the 1st amendment is very clear. Congress may not pass laws that PROHIBIT expression of religious beliefs. “Prohibit” and “infringe” are two different things. If what you said was true, the Congress (and via the 14th amendment, the states) could not, for example, pass laws that forbid human sacrifice as a part of religious expression, which is obviously not true.

          “As you folk want to force Christians to violate their faith if they are in business,”

          I’m not sure what you mean by “you folk”, but I have no desire to “force” Christians to violate their faith. Anti-discrimination laws require that those who CHOOSE to open a business operate according to the law. If people do not like the laws surrounding operating a business they should not open a business until they are able to get the laws changed to their liking. In general, since opening a business is a choice, I do not believe that those who operate a business should be allowed to break the law using their religious beliefs as a valid rationale for doing so.

          “you have made the 1st Amendment null and void”

          That is nothing more than false hyperbole.

          “because you are anti-Christian”

          No, I am not. Most of my friends and family are members of the Christian faith. in addition, much good has been done, and continues to be done, by people who are motivated by their faith. I have absolutely no animosity toward the Christian faith, nor any religious belief.

          • Fundisi

            Yes, you have no animosity against liberal Christian beliefs, Christian is okay if it submits to your liberal dogma, otherwise you fight them and try and silence them, drive them out of business, out of the work place just as God said you would at this time in history,

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Completely untrue. I have no animosity toward any religion – conservative or liberal. I fully support your right to believe as you wish, to follow those beliefs, and to share your beliefs with others. I have desire to silence anyone, or drive anyone out of business, or out of their job.

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      There is a difference between expressing your faith and using it as an excuse to act like a jackass.

      • Fundisi

        That is meaningless nonsense, you should learn how to communicate ideas better.

        If a Christian is asked to violate their faith, whether you agree or not, it is their obligation to God to refuse no matter the costs.

        • Spoob

          No one’s being asked to violate their faith. It’s a bakery. They bake cakes. A cake was ordered. It should have been provided. End of business transaction.

          • Fundisi

            A Christian should obey the law until it opposes God’s Word and then they are to obey God and not man, no matter the consequences. They were being forced to provide a product for a wicked ceremony, something God condemns. yes, I know you are not a Christians and do not believe it is a sin.

          • Spoob

            Why is it you always feel the worst and most damning thing you can say to me is that I’m not a Christian? Or call me a “liberal”? I don’t give a damn whether you think I’m a Christian or not, and you are so ULTRA right-wing that ANYONE is liberal compared to you!

          • Fundisi

            It is funny, I have often been called liberal.

            I say liberal, because just like liberals, you defend sin, you insist even Christians should not oppose sin and not on God’s Word against sin. Like all liberals, you constantly attack Christians and the Christian faith, making yourself an enemy of Christ, thus both a liberal and non-Christian by your words and actions.

          • Spoob

            It is not “defending sin” to suggest that something is NOT sin. That’s the part you seem to not like here. And why would I attack Christians when I am one myself? What I am attacking is bigotry and stupidity that normal decent Christians have the good sense to avoid.

          • Fundisi

            You can call yourself a Christian but you have proven here that you have no part with Christ and you will discover that on Judgment Day unless you repent and find Christ before then.

            So you can show from scripture what no one else can, you can give us scripture wherein God approves of homosexuality, lesbianism and gay marriage, right? You can prove every passage that condemns these things are false, right?

          • Spoob

            I have proven nothing of the kind, bigot. How dare you define who is and who is not a Christian based on your own small-minded ideas and hate? How many more people on this site have to tell you that you are not God, and that you don’t speak for God?

          • Oshtur

            God has never disapproved of homosexuality in a context that He doesn’t also disapprove of heterosexuality, i.e. promiscuity, idolatry, adultery. And He has said that in this world the ability to be celibate is not a gift all receive, that those who don’t should marry and that there is no male or female in the body of Christ so Christians can marry just fine whatever their sexes. And of course when married the marital bed is undefiled.

            What you can’t show is a blanket condemnation of homosexuality or anywhere that Christians can’t marry regardless of their ‘male or female’.

  • The Last Trump

    “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” Mathew 5:10.
    Bring it.

    • Oshtur

      You mean the customer’s, right?

      • Garrett

        No. You don’t believe OR read the Bible, do you?

        • Oshtur

          Wrong on both guesses. Those logs are greatly restricting your vision it seems.

          • The Last Trump

            Those aren’t logs. They’re penises. And we would very much appreciate if you deviants would put them away. Enough of this LGBT in your face 24/7 nonsense. There’s more to life folks.

          • Oshtur

            Ah but that is the case their weren’t any involved in this case at all. It was the business owners obsessed with their sexual fantasies about the customer’s – they just wanted to buy an advertised cake.

          • The Last Trump

            My mistake. Strap ons it is. Hard to tell the diff with SO MANY IN OUR FACE day after day.

          • Oshtur

            Remind me never to have you at a wedding – it is twelve levels of creepy that two people marrying makes you see of phallic symbols.

          • The Last Trump

            Who keeps talking about logs, Wood Lover.
            And um, you aren’t actually giving yourself up votes are you?
            How embarrassing. (Or maybe your supporters prefer to remain anonymous, eh? Probably a good idea.)

          • Oshtur

            And so you see phallic symbols when you look at a fire place. Twisted.

            And you can’t upvote yourself.

          • The Last Trump

            Ooops. You forgot the up vote that time. Strange, eh, that none appeared THAT time….
            Here you go, deviant. I feel bad about all of those single, un-named guest votes you have all by their lonesome. Here’s a freebie.

          • Oshtur

            You seem to be the master of self promotion. I guess you know a way to vote for yourself. Obvious you don’t have anything to actually contribute to the article discussion.

          • The Last Trump

            Uh huh. Might wanna scroll back up to the top, there genius.
            Attention to detail not one of your strong suits, eh? Go figure.
            Oh, and don’t worry about your up vote. I’ll get this one too.
            (Funny how they just stopped all of a sudden…)

          • Oshtur

            The top? Oh you think votes actually mean something!!! Hilarious.

          • The Last Trump

            Nah, THEY don’t reflect in any way someone’s contribution to a discussion! (hee, hee!) Not in your experience anyway, eh? Shocker. And this from a guy who actually takes the time to UP VOTE HIMSELF! Too funny.
            Oh, don’t get up “Oshtur” (is that moron for “I Give Myself Up Votes”?). I’ll get this one for you too, bro. I’ve got more than my fair share.
            Just so sad….

          • Oshtur

            No they don’t, only a fool worries about the votes on Disqus. But they seem of great concern to you and you seem to know someway to game them.

            So you’re just a self-grandizing troll. Shocked.

          • The Last Trump

            Don’t worry, “Gives Himself Upvotes”. I got it.

          • Spoob

            I upvoted him. He’s correct, and you are not.

          • Spoob

            Welcome to the Wonderful World of Trumpy. Always in there like a dirty shirt when the subject is the mean bad wicked satanic homosexuals. He loves to play to the crowd, I am seeing all the usual hallmarks – the sarcasm, the “too funnys”, the “hee hees”, the self-aggrandizing. He hopes to be mistaken for someone witty someday.

          • Spoob

            Ah, so you’re making friends over here as well? All the usual tactics, sneering, name calling? What a MODEL Christian.

          • Spoob

            I’m sure you DO have many in your face every day. But at least Ted Haggard was forthright about it.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            If you have a lot of penises in your face every day….well then you do.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            You have penises in your eyes? Kinky!

        • James Grimes

          That’s obvious, isn’t it?

    • Fundisi

      Forgive me, but I am going to reply to you, so this post will go to the top of the post, as yours has the most up votes. This really isn’t to you.

      In the original story this bakery never refused gay customers, in this case they did not refuse to sell a cake to a Lesbian, but when it became apparent that they wanted it to be decorated to celebrate a Lesbian marriage, which the owner objected to because of his faith, such a decoration making him a willing participant in this corruption of God designed marriage, that is where the problem arose. They were not against gay or any customers, they were not discriminating, what they could not do is decorate it with a Lesbian Marriage theme, that is all.

      • JJNYC

        It’s ALSO unconstitutional.

        • Fundisi

          What is unconstitutional?

          • JJNYC

            Demanding that a private business do business with someone they don’t want to. More likely the homosexuals are just instigating. There are plenty of bakeries that would be happy to do business with them. Whiny brats.

          • Fundisi

            If it was a product or service critical to their life and/or was not available withing a reasonable distance, they might and I only say might, have a point, but as you suggest they could have gone elsewhere quite easily. They could have then made it know that this business did not cater to gay weddings and allowed the marketplace to decide. But, they deliberately choose confrontation to ruin such a business and to force Christians to submit to their sinful lifestyle choice.

          • JJNYC

            Thank you.

          • Taussig

            do you have any proof that the bakery was targeted? nope.

          • Oshtur

            It’s their go to lie. They know this customer had bought a wedding cake for their mother’s wedding previously from this bakery and had returned to purchase their own.

            But never let the facts get in the way of a chance to pin someone as a martyr.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Demanding that a private business do business with someone they don’t want to.”

            What portion of the constitution do you believe is being violated as relates to civil rights and anti-discrimination laws?

            “More likely the homosexuals are just instigating.”

            What is your basis for believing that?

            Do you believe that holding people accountable to the law results in a person being a “whiny brat”?

          • JJNYC

            Accountable? That’s crap and you know it. Because this bakery is NOT the ONLY one in town. This is NOT the first time I’ve seen this happen. WHINY HOMOSEXUALS who don’t get their way. I guess you didn’t get the first time I wrote this: “Demanding that a private business do business with someone they don’t want to.” So now the WHINY HOMOSEXUALS will be ACCOUNTABLE if this couple has to close their doors. What a WHINY legacy… they must be proud.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Accountable? That’s crap and you know it.”

            No, it’s not “crap”. There were, indeed, held accountable for breaking the law.

            “Because this bakery is NOT the ONLY one in town.”

            How is that relevant to the bakery breaking the law?

            “This is NOT the first time I’ve seen this happen.”

            Seen what happen? A business being held accountable to the law?

            “”Demanding that a private business do business with someone they don’t want to.””

            Which, in this case, the law requires. Just as it does based upon race, creed, age, disability, gender, etc. If you have issue with that, then you should be working to repeal all civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation.

            “So now the WHINY HOMOSEXUALS will be ACCOUNTABLE if this couple has to close their doors.”

            The actions of the owners were their own. No one is accountable for the consequences of their decisions but them.

            “What a WHINY legacy… they must be proud.”

            You are certainly free to view holding a business accountable to the law as “whiny”. Based upon your views, a black person who was turned away from a business based upon their being black, and then takes legal action against the business, is also ‘whiny’.

          • JJNYC

            Whiny homosexuals. Cry until they get something. Homosexuals are NOT an ethnic group.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Homosexuals are NOT an ethnic group.”

            How is that relevant?

          • JJNYC

            Homosexuals keep screaming about civil rights.

          • Oshtur

            I don’t think you understand what the term ‘civil rights’ means since it has nothing to do with ethnicity nor would it being about sexual orientation preclude from involving:

            civil rights the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality

          • JJNYC

            I do know and understand. Maybe you don’t like what I said. Yes… homosexuals want “equality”… NO.

          • Oshtur

            Oh well, oddly I don’t care what you want.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Yeah. Funny how citizens do that when their rights are being restricted unreasonably. I guess you would prefer that people whose rights are being restricted just be quiet about it, huh?

          • Nuvalde

            Philip Leitweis-Goff, is that you?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            That depends. Are presents, money, or cake involved if I am? 🙂

            No, I am not Philip Leitweis-Goff.

          • Oshtur

            The business freely offered wedding cakes for sale to the general public knowing full well they had a constitutionally and legally protected right to their own beliefs about marriage.

          • sandyinindy

            I just read where Indiana Univ. students had pulled the plug on a Chik-fli-a (sp) from opening there due to the fact Chik is a Christian owned business. Students were yelling that Chik was intolerant!!!

        • dark477
          • JJNYC

            So what?

          • dark477

            The SCOTUS has ruled and it isn’t unconstitutional

          • JJNYC

            So what? SCOTUS has judges who hate God and don’t care. It’s still unconstitutional.

          • dark477

            They’re the one that decide that not you.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          It’s not unconstitutional. It is illegal. There is a difference.

      • Oshtur

        How many times are you going to repeat the same lie? We have the finding of facts agreed on by both sides, the customer’s were rejected before cake style selection had even occurred.

        • Fundisi

          Because I remember the original story, not your liberal sanitized version.

          • Oshtur

            Lying comes easy to you. This is the record of fact that the bakers swore was accurate, not the fairytale you’ve concocted.

          • Fundisi

            No, I am not good at lying, I’m not a liberal. But, I have learned, stick to the first version it is usually the truth.

          • Oshtur

            Show us the link then, it’s the age of the Internet – just show us this mysterious article that either makes the bakers liars then or liars now.

            Ball in your court.

          • Fundisi

            I am an old man and am not as up on the internet and besides, I am not going to invest the time to play your games to help a Christian hater like you. Do it yourself. By the way, you are getting tiresome and boring, go to your gay bar and get a drink.

          • Oshtur

            Yeah right, we can compare birthdays someday as well as Church attendance. I already did a scan of all stories about this with increasingly limiting dates, story is always the same never the lie you are either creating or repeating. January 2013 put up or be called on it every time.

          • Fundisi

            As I said, even if I am wrong in my recollections and I could be, it is not worth fighting about; and I am not wasting time on you, it is still wrong for your gay pals to force a Christian to sell them a cake for immoral purposes. You don’t like it, tough, I really don’t care anything about you.

            You do not attend a real Christian Church and defend homosexuality or gay marriage or it is a false church. So attend the Gay Metropolitan Church all you want, you won’t find Christ there.

          • Oshtur

            Right the liar who denies what comes from God is going to tell me about a real Christian Church

          • Fundisi

            You are a liberal, you like calling people liars.

            What am I denying that comes from God?

          • Oshtur

            Stereotypes, slander, lies, questioning my relationship from God. I will pray for you as you are in great need.

          • hapy_thoughts

            Fundisi, you need to lay off the Fox News. It’s bad for your heart. We all know “God” was an angry, jealous, petty jerk (i.e. flooding the earth, pillars of salt, killing every first born son of Egypt, ect.). But Jesus said that it is important to love everyone. It didn’t matter to Jesus if you were sick, poor, a criminal or a whore (boy did Jesus love some whores). The point I’m trying to make is that you shouldn’t be afraid, threatened, or so judgmental of people who think differently than you. If “God” made all of us, and if “He” truly is without fault, then they are here for a rseaon.

          • Fundisi

            Actually, I watch FOX less and less now days.

            So God made Hitler and wanted him to conduct the Holocaust too? Jesus loved Hitler and Stalin?

          • hapy_thoughts

            Firstly, comparing what two consenting adults do in their own home to the actions of Adolf Hitler is quite a leap. None-the-less, I believe it was Jesus who said, “Whatsoever you do the unto the least of my brothers, this you do unto me.”

          • Gary

            Hitler was not Jesus’ brother. Kwiers are not Jesus’ brothers and sisters. And neither are you.

          • Fundisi

            I did not make that comparison, I asked a question based on your statement “If “God” made all of us, and if “He” truly is without fault, then they are here for a reason.” To see how far your reasoning went.

            God did not make Hitler, He did not make gays, they came into this world by procreation, by normal sexual relations. He permits us free will, which mostly results in people being born that refuse to serve Him and engage in all sorts of perverse sins.

          • hapy_thoughts

            Awe… Christians are so cute when they talk about free will. You blindly follow the writings of sheep herders from 3000 years ago is not free will. You are willing to discriminate against people either because you have been promised heaven as a reward, or because you feel the threat of hell. That’s called manipulation, not free will.

          • Fundisi

            If I promise you a million dollars and give you a check, it is up to you (free will) whether you believe me and go to the bank to cash it or choose not to believe me, tear up the check and stay poor. That is not manipulation, it is a free gift that must by faith be received and acted upon. God offers every man His Salvation as a free gift, it is by His grace, not based on any merit of yours. But, you have the free will to either believe (faith) Him, acting upon His offer or reject the gift and go to hell.

            God is holy and no one can be with Him with the slightest stain of sin, so He discriminates against sinners; but He is willing, by Christ, to have His Son pay for all your sins and give you the power not to sin again so that you can be with Him – as a free gift. But, you and those like you, say no, I choose to keep sinning – I like my sins, I don’t want to change my lifestyle, so I don’t want you to forgive my sins and give me the power to stop sinning. That is free will and in your free will you choose to reject God’s gift, you cannot blame Him, He loves you and offers you heaven and eternal life, but you must accept His gift by faith, acting upon it, or reject it, it is up to you.

          • hapy_thoughts

            I have a problem with so much of that, I don’t know where to start. If you give me a check for a million dollars, thats a free gift. If you give me a check for a million dollars and say, “If you want this, you are going to work for me the rest of your life spreading whatever messages i give you without questioning it,” then you are manipulating me. Everything else you are saying is based in the idea that the Bible is absolutely right. That is simply not true. In the Bilble it is stated that the Sun revolves around the Earth. Science has been able to prove that there is no truth to that. So can’t the bible be wrong about other things?

          • Fundisi

            First, if you are guilty of a crime leading to death and then pardoned, would you have earn that pardon, after the pardon would you have to work to keep it? God offers us a free salvation, which includes deliverance from sin, not a demand for ministry. Yet, how ungrateful would you be to have been pardoned and then go back to the very things that caused you to need a pardon in the first place?

            It is a misinterpretation of Scripture that the Bible teaches a geocentric universe. Yes, it speaks of the sun rising and setting, but that is exactly the language we use today, but we know the earth orbits the sun. It is a matter of less than precise language, but that nonetheless describes the sun’s activity in our sky.

            With a little effort and time, you will find that the Bible is not wrong about anything, there are no true errors or contradictions, it is as perfect as it’s Divine Author.

          • hapy_thoughts

            That’s more manipulation. Even in your hypothetical situation, your asking me to assume I’m a guilty party.You are essentially trying to shame me into believing what you do. I’m might not be the best person in the world (I guess this conversation might be evidence that I can be rude), but I can look myself in the mirror and say that I am honest with people, I don’t hurt people and I have done nothing worth recieving the death penalty.

            You do however make an interesting point about the geocentric universe. After doing some research, though there are mentions of the Sun’s movement, and that the Earth does not move, but they are not really mentioned together and I do see how these statements could be interpreted metaphoricly. However, this did not stop the Catholic Church for rejecting the notion, sentecing Galileo to exile, and holding back the pursuit of knowledge just so they could look right. Are you starting to see why assuming the bible can’t be wrong might be detrimental?

            Why do christians assume that people who don’t believe in god are just haven’t read the bible yet? I grew up in a christian household. I’ve read the bible. I wasn’t impressed.

          • Oshtur

            Does God love sinners? Does God love even His enemies? Seriously?

            Guess it’s my turn to ask what church do you belong to?

          • hapy_thoughts

            So is “God” flawed for creating his own enemies (whatever that may mean). Are they not also “His” creations and thusly “His” responsiblity?

          • Oshtur

            He created Satan knowing full well what he would do, seems everything else is lesser than that, right?

          • hapy_thoughts

            I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to send you that. It appears we were both chatting with the same bigoted fundisi and i sent that to the wrong person. But thank you for that thought on the matter though.

          • Oshtur

            I’m just amazed at the things he says and he can still maintain his certitude of his righteousness over others.

          • hapy_thoughts

            Right!? I have never heard of someone using cake for immoral reasons. He is just using faith as an excuse for ignorance.

          • Fundisi

            It is a lie that I assert any greater righteousness than anyone, I am a sinner saved by Grace.

          • Fundisi

            God loves the whole world, He sent His Son to pay for our sins; yet, as a God of Justice, if we refuse His salvation He will surely deny us heaven and thereby we will have chosen hell.

          • Oshtur

            And you know either of those refused salvation? That He didn’t love them?

            Your hubris is a burden to you.

          • Fundisi

            Which two? What hubris?

          • Wraith

            Are you a Christian at all? I mean, a true Christian, if the term applies to you…

          • Oshtur

            I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior and taken the New Covenant accepting His undeserved gift of Grace. But again you, if you are a true Christian, hold that God loves sinners and His enemies just as He asked us to do, right?

          • Wraith

            As I told you, I am not a Christian, to be truly a Christian, you must practice & put to work what it is written in the Book, otherwise you are attempting to supersede the Word of God, the Ultimate authority on how you must live your life. To tell you that I am a Christian would be a lie. So no lies, but as I told you, I do know scripture, theology, hermeneutics, scatology. I have been into several denominations. I have studied Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, & even Latin. What you state is true, I am not going to refute your statement, but God is also justice, & he did establish since the begging that a union was between a man & a woman, & you have to recognize that even biologically speaking it makes sense because the three major religions of this world do follow the laws of human biology for that matter. The book of Genesis in the Torah does state that God created man & a woman. I am not going to question that at all, & I am not going to supersede it either.

            But it seems that so many so called Christians are adopting progressive, liberal, & even humanistic ideologies, just to please groups of peoples.

            You should see our studies, both LGBTQ movement combined with abortion is population control in the false gaze of human rights. In reality you are promoting 21st century eugenics by implementing free will to it.

          • Oshtur

            More blah blah blah. Christians marry just fine and no you can’t replace the word of Zgod with the word of man as you are trying to do.

            You can’t decide for someone else if they are Christian, the hubris and arrogance of that. God said there is no make or female in the body of Christ, Christians marry just fine regardless of their sexes.

            But again your theological errors are irrelevant since all have a right to their own free exercise. I’m still waiting for you to explain how a business can constitutional engage in religious discrimination in s public offering.

            Pretty obviously you can’t dince each time I ask you toss out every red herring in your barrel AND the kitchen sink for good measure.

          • Wraith

            It’s not my word, or my own opinion, it is there, I can cite it from the very source, the Book, I can cite it from the very Torah, from the 10 commandments, “a man shall not lay with another man,” but again, your political correct buddies will not allow it to post. You are right, I can’t decide for someone else if he or she is a Christian or not, but you can tell who is being honest about it, & who is living a lie. Which one are you?

            I am still waiting for you to state why you & the judicial system are taking away freedom of faith by imposing same marriage to the rest of us that we don’t want to be forced to recognize. I already told you why I cannot recognize it, & it based on biology, not religion. You want to preserve the State, you need a solid family nucleus that produces future citizens.

          • Oshtur

            I really don’t care about the Torah, it’s of historical interest to s Christian only since they were never under the Old Covenant and are only under the New.

            Again you can’t justify the religious discrimination by the business – that much is now obvious and because of that it will lose in every court for that reason

          • Wraith

            There are certain things that don’t change, & Jesus didn’t come to get rid of the Torah, he came to fulfill the law, & since he came to fulfill the law, Jesus would not re-define what marriage was back in the day either.

            You cannot justify why the judicial system is taking the right of free faith from citizens.

          • Oshtur

            If you are referring to the customer the business freely invited to do business I can’t agree more. That’s why the ruling came down as it did.

            And Christians were never under the covenant with Abraham and his descendants so what does that have to do with this case?

          • Wraith

            Jesus came to the Jews first, then to the Gentiles, but then again, you don’t get that at all, do you? Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to the destroy it. He came to the Jews first, then spread his teachings to the gentiles, in that order.

            It matters because even ancient Christian gentiles didn’t mention anything at all about the unions that you are promoting right now. They all understood that matrimony was between a man & a woman, & they preserve that family nucleus like that.

          • Oshtur

            Again quieting Jesys talking to a crowd under the Old Covenant and even He ssid it would last until it was fulfilled – and it was by His blood sacrifice on the Cross.

            But again I really don’t care what you think it means because all beliefs are equslly protected.

          • Wraith

            No, I will not. I am not a preacher, nor a Christian, but I can assure you, you are even worse. 1st you claim to be a Christian, & yet you have no scriptural backing at all. 2nd, you do defy the laws of nature, there is no scientific backing on what you are proposing at all. You base your logic on feelings instead of the biological laws of human biology.

            As for your false statement, no, not all beliefs are equally protected, clearly, the faith of this man was not protected by this liberal judge at all.

          • Oshtur

            What’s amazing is you probably thing that makes perfect sense. Again, you can believe what ever you want; get a planet to rule when you die, escaping the wrath of Xemu, whatever. But what you can’t do is infringe on another citizen’s right to believe something else entirely.

          • Wraith

            Oh! So it does make sense to recognize 2 men or 2 women as a union? Yeah! It makes sense to the rest of us… Again, keep your LGBTQ brethren, & we shall see what sort of State you can maintain for 100 years without offspring. I do challenge you openly, you are cordially invited to participate. Without the true family nucleus, your movement cannot survive, & by true family nucleus I am referring to the union of a man & a woman.

            You already infringed the freedom of faith when these people decided to sanction this baker. & we do protest that fact.

          • Oshtur

            And again with the crazy talk of separating something mixed and acting like that proves anything. Not everyone is supposed to breed in human society. That you are obsessed with this unnatural state to the point you want to divide society into breeders and non-breeders is will. Think, a society of gay people would breed just fine – you don’t have to be sexually attracted to someone to breed with them.

            Again you argue like a Jesuit – they make so many baseless assumptions before they even start the discussion and wonder why everyone laughs at them.

          • Wraith

            I’ll tell you what is crazy, it is crazy to believe that homosexuality is truly following the natural norm of human biology, that is crazy. It is crazy to expect that the rest will accept such behavior as natural, even if we know it goes against natural selection laws.

            We have to discuss the fact that family nucleus is composed of those people that can produce new offspring because without them the State cannot survive. I know that it is bothersome to you, but your group of people cannot procreate, & that in the long run for the State is an issue.

          • Oshtur

            Please! With the way fetal neurological sexual dimorphism develops it would be a miracle if there weren’t members of both sexes attracted to either, both, and neither.

            ‘Natural’ is the reason for marriage equality.

          • Wraith

            According to you, & your logic, & your humanistic view of things, but the reality is that there is still a divide in human biology, man & a woman for the preservation of the human species, & one cannot do without the other. Your argument is progressive argument. But again, keep your LGBTQ brethren & try to form a nation with only them. No straights, just LGBTQ for you, just to see what will result out of it. If it so natural as you lciam, then why 2 men 0r 2 women cannot produce offspring?

          • Oshtur

            Why would they want to? A social snimal doesn’t want every member to breed. Again 20 times as many male femsle couples never mingle chromosomes and the species gets by just fine. Worrying about the minority shows yours is just a rationalization for an agenda nothing more.

          • Wraith

            You are wrong, it goes beyond this, this is not only the promotion of your so called human rights, but the destruction of the 1st amendment, & sad to say, but you are participating in that process. Why should someone be afraid of to say that homosexuals are wrong? Why should someone be fearful to state that they can keep their lifestyle, but they don’t want to participate in their practices? Clearly, this baker does not want to participate. I wouldn’t either, & as a citizen, I do have the right to say NO!!!

            It’s not the majority that worry me, it is governmental imposition, which clearly is happening right now. Again, what’s next? Lowering the consent age? Or maybe allowing government to mark you with a biometrical microchip like dogs or cattle? How about marking you on the forehead or the right hand? After all, government is right & you are wrong as a citizen because government knows better than you….

          • Oshtur

            Again the bakery shouldn’t be offering anything to the public that can’t sold to people of all beliefs.

            Their freely made choice. There is no right to religious discrimination in a public offering, never has been.

          • Wraith

            As a small business owner I can do whatever I want with my business & enter into business with whoever I want. If I see that I don’t want to conduct business with a particular person or other businessmen, I do have the right to decline. As a business-owner, this baker has the same right to enter or not enter into business with whoever he wants, & you are not going to tell the rest of us business-owners otherwise. You can go into Chick-Fil-A if you want to, you don’t have the right to destroy them because they disagree with you. As a matter of fact, your political correct buddies attempted that, Ram Emanuel was one of them, & all of them, all of you, failed epically to convince the public to boycott Chick-Fil-A. The same thing happen with the Duck Dynasty incident. You wanted to punish them, & you failed yet again. Now you are pouring your fury with this poor man because he disagrees with you. I agree with Fundisi, so let me quote Fundisi…

            “In the original story this bakery never refused gay customers, in this case they did not refuse to sell a cake to a Lesbian, but when it became apparent that they wanted it to be decorated to celebrate a Lesbian marriage, which the owner objected to because of his faith, such a decoration making him a willing participant in this corruption of God designed marriage, that is where the problem arose. They were not against gay or any customers, they were not discriminating, what they could not do is decorate it with a Lesbian Marriage theme, that is all.” & I do quote Fundisi.

            Fundisi is right, you people are changing the story, attempting to vilify the baker. In reality you people are the villeins, not the baker.

          • Wraith

            Oh! But you should care about the Torah, it is part of the Bible, & it is there for a reason. Plus, Jesus didn’t come to get rid of the Torah, he came to fulfill it. It is scriptural, & yes, Jesus came to place a new covenant with men, but never endorsed the things that you are promoting. Jesus is not a progressive liberal messiah.

            I don’t recognize same unions as the ones that you are promoting. Not because of religion, or because I think they are a sin, but because you cannot sustain a State with such unions in the long run. It is also a direct attack to the true family nucleus, the one that does sustain the ranks & numbers of the State, the one that can actually replenish the State overtime.

          • Oshtur

            Ha! Well when Americans exist for the state and not the state for Americans I might take you a bit more seriously.

          • Wraith

            No, on the contrary, the very existence of the State is because of We the People. The State works for We the People, not the other way around. Without We the People, the State would not be a reality. California did follow democratic protocol, & the State did not respect the voices & the votes of We the People pertaining matrimony. I cannot take you seriously at all.

          • Liz Litts

            What you people fail to understand (or don’t want to) is that Jesus loved sinners-but he never left them the way he found them–He told the ‘whores”‘ Go and sin no more–He told Matthew to stop working of the Roman equivelant of the IRS–If you read the Bible for yourself-instead of parroting the popular hearsay, you would know that. and oh, by the way-“Don’t judge” is not a get of jail free card–if you read on you will see that it says in Matthew 6 you will see that is also says you will be judged the same way you judge others. and that works both ways. All of you who look down your sanctitmonious noses at ‘Christians haters’ better just look to yourselves.

          • hapy_thoughts

            What you fail to realize (or don’t want to), is Jesus still treated people with dignity and and respect, even if he didn’t agree with them. And fact of the matter is if you have read the Bible, you would be able to realize that all those gay bashing passages of Leviticus, are in reference to the laws of a 3000 years old city, not the word of God. And even if those passages were a direct quote from the “Almighty,” if we followed the bible word for word, slavery would still be legal. And the bible speaks much more clearly and frequently about slavery, including laws on how to justly kill your slaves, and stating that is is appropriate to rape your own slaves, but immoral to rape someone else’s slave. You are allowed to believe what you want to believe, I don’t want to take that away from you. But this insistance that everyone has to feel the same way you do, that is is morally correct to pass laws that are discriminatory to an entire demographic of people is religious oppression. If there were any scientific data or statistics to show that homosexuality were detrimental to society, there would at least be a basis for this idea. But since this doesn’t exist, this is just religion resisting different ideas like they have done since religion was created (for example the church spoke out against ending slavery, against women having the right to vote, and justified the near genocide of the “savage” Native Americans). Believe what you want to, but if you are gonna harass other people with it, you better have some facts to back it up.

          • Caleb W

            Try to find some actually Bible verses on that justification of slavery, but it doesn’t matter because that is a red herring. Stick to the argument at hand. You can pick and pull to justify homosexuality if you want to, but it is still absolutely sin. It is direct disobedience of God and Jesus Christ’s teachings. God paired man and woman, not man and man, woman and woman, or what have you. Of course nobody has to adhere to God’s Word if they don’t believe in it. They don’t have to do anything, they can be whatever and whoever they want. It still doesn’t bring them satisfaction, regardless of what people say. This world’s idea of a self-serving life sucks a person bone dry until death reaps the final breath.

          • hapy_thoughts

            When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

            You’re on the internet. You have google. Why am I doing this for you?

            And if you want to talk about the “pairing of a man and woman,” this quote shows that god also endorses the bonds between a man and his many wives.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “it is still wrong for your gay pals to force a Christian to sell them a cake for immoral purposes.”

            Not a function of “gay pals” forcing anyone to do anything. Anti-discrimination laws were put into place by either a vote of the people or by their elected representatives – the majority in both cases being heterosexual.

            The bakers are not “forced” to make a cake. The bakers are free to decide what type of services they want to offer. Based upon that, they are required to offer those services in accordance with the law. If they do not, they, like all of us who break the law, can be held accountable.

            “I really don’t care anything about you.”

            Not a very Christian attitude.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            So you can’t provide proof of your claim.

          • JJNYC

            B.S. And I am a Christan. And… I’ve also been following this from the beginning.

          • Fundisi

            A. As I said elsewhere, if I mixed up the facts from this story with other bakeries in the news in that past couple of years that were caught up in this damnable mess, I regret the confusion and mixing the stories.

            B. Saying you are a Christian or anyone making that claim is meaningless. I don’t know you – you may be a Christian and are not defending this mess, but any Christian that does defend homosexuality or gay marriage or forcing Christian to compromise their faith is a Christian in name only, they do not know God or God’s Word.

          • Badkey

            You’re lying.

          • Churchj5

            You’re remembering what you want to and then blaming the evil liberals when your errors are called out.

      • Cody Ashley

        Taking no sides just curious. I thought as a business owner you had the right to not serve someone ?

        • Oshtur

          But not for any reason just as you can not hire someone but not for any reason.

          There is no right to apply religious litmus tests to customers they have to pass to do business, their own right to religious freedom shields them from such licentious acts.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Not since the passage of the Civil Rights Act has a business owner had the right to turn away a customer for any reason whatsoever. That’s why the signs that I saw growing up “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” you no longer see.

          There are still many reasons that a business can set regarding serving a customer. Those reasons, however, cannot be ones which violate civil rights and anti-discrimination laws.

          • JJNYC

            Homosexuals ARE NOT a race. Homosexuals = whiny brats.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Homosexuals ARE NOT a race.”

            Correct. Did you have a point?

          • SmokeyBehr

            No only that, but according to Obama, Homosexuality is a choice.

          • TheG

            Religion is also a choice. Do you approve of a business refusing service to Christians because of the deity they chose to worship?

        • Fundisi

          Not any more.

        • ELAINE MARZANO

          that is how it used to be. And it still should be. how would you like it if you went into a restaurant and you picked out off the menu what you wanted to eat but the owner came out and said I am sorry but you have to have this to eat. you can’t have what you want You would ask why? He would say because we are being forced to make what we are told we have to make and nothing else. Why are we being pushed to accommodate someone that really did not care about what they were asking for. they were their because they wanted to cause disruption for the owner of the bakery. If they were not they would have left and found a bakery that would accommodate them. so that tells me they did not give two hoots about their wedding cake.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “that is how it used to be. And it still should be”

            If you believe that to be true, then you should be working to repeal all civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including that which covers discrimination based upon religious belief. Is that what you think should be done?

            Your analogy is not valid. No business is forced to provide certain services. What services/products a business provides is their choice. With that said, whatever they CHOOSE to provide, they must provide to customers within the requirements of the law.

            “If they were not they would have left and found a bakery that would accommodate them.”

            So if an interracial couple were turned away because the owner had sincerely held religious beliefs that the races should not mix, rather than holding the business accountable to the law, the couple should just go find another bakery, correct? So then you believe it is wrong to hold a business accountable to the law, correct?

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            Why is it we have to change everything if we say one thing is not right. Let me say I have had it with change . We have had change for 6 years and look at us now. we are a freaking mess. Now stop that crap you asked about one thing . and I answered you . now that is all I am going to say. if you are looking for your 5 minutes of fame look somewhere else.

          • Oshtur

            You like the great recession, two wars, an less access to health care better than now?

            Amazing no accounting for tastes.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            And another jerk. if you are happy with your health care good for you. why do you insist that I am saying I don’t approve of change? Good needed change but not crap change that destroys our pocket books and our lives. haven’t you had enough for the last 6 years . look around and tell me we are better off.

          • Oshtur

            You have less money now than in the depths of the recession? My life, finances, and general well being is massively better than 6 years ago. What exactly hasn’t gotten better for you?

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            Maybe you should share that with everyone. I really am glad for you. you are one of the lucky ones. as for me I am retired and that is being threatened as we speak. so I think if you are doing well that is great. unfortunately the rest of us are not. but we are hoping for a better future.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “that is being threatened as we speak”

            In what way is your retirement being threatened?

            “unfortunately the rest of us are not.”

            So he is the only person for whom record low interest rates, record highs in the stock market, increased employment, low gas prices, low inflation, and a declining budget deficit, is helping?

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            right.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “right’, what?

          • Thomas Collins Jr June

            Stagnant wages for the middle class, more people on welfare, Medicade and more service/minimum wage jobs plus taxpayers supplementing Obamacare. Yeah things are worse now.

          • Oshtur

            Yeah we all remember how the Republicans were screaming the government can’t make jobs.

            Not getting a high enough wage? Look to the 1% who are morally comfortable with paying themselves 100’s of times more than their employees, not the government. Most of your other complaints flow from there – the loss of a sense of morality by the very rich.

            The parable of the foolish rich man is what’s applicable here.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “crap change that destroys our pocket books and our lives”

            What change over the past 6 years has destroyed your pocket book and your life?

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            Same answer. Agree or disagree. that’s fine with me. That information is private and personal.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            You seem to have no issue sharing your personal views on other issues. Why is it you don’t want to explain how a statement you made is actually true?

            It seem pretty disingenuous to make such a grand statement that your pocket book and life has been destroyed, and then refuse to explain how that has happened. But, it does seem that you are willing to make statements about how others have negatively impacted your life without providing any basis for that. Unfortunate, as it speaks to your credibility and integrity.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            that is not what I said . That is why I will not answer you.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “that is not what I said”

            You said: “change that destroys our pocket books and our lives.”

            Were you not including yourself in “our”?

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            OK, I will say this again. what ever transpired in my life is not for public display. Would you want to tell your private life ? So what I am saying is we are all having hard times. you can not deny this. if you do then you are the lucky one. You have the right to say what you want and to believe what you want. But so do I. So I believe what I said is true. And I also believe I have no reason to tell you my private business. and no one should ask me to. OH yes I said our. and I think that includes me. I will not answer another post so don’t bother to ask.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “what ever transpired in my life is not for public display. ”

            You seem to be selective in that. You were fine sharing that your “pocket book and life” has been “destroyed”, but you seem to have an issue in explaining how.

            “Would you want to tell your private life ?”

            If I have posted publicly about something that happened in my life, than I have no issue whatsoever in explaining it.

            “what I am saying is we are all having hard times. you can not deny this.”

            Yes, I can. There are millions who were unemployed 6 years ago who are now working. There were millions who did not have health care coverage but now do. Anyone who was buying gasoline over the past 6 years is now paying less. Anyone who has a home has seen its value rise over the past 6 years. Anyone who has investments in the stock market has seen their value rise over the past 6 years.

            “no one should ask me to.”

            Then don’t post about it on a public forum.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            What is your problem? I explained every thing and said do not ask me again. and here we are again back at the beginning . Since when ahs a public forum mean I owe you anything about my private life unless I want you to know been the normal. I can say anything I want and refuse to give out what I don’t want you to know. You are the only one asking me. I see nothing in the rules that said I hade to tell you. I answered your question and that should have been the end of it. last time please do not post me again.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            In regards to our conversation, I have no problem.

            No, you did not explain everything you said as is clear by your responses in which you refused to explain the basis for your statements.

            You are quite correct that you owe me nothing. You are certainly free to say anything you want to and to refuse to give out information that would support your claims.

            “I answered your question”

            No, you did not answer my questions. You provided your excuse for not answering them and for not backing up your specious claims.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            Again I do not have to answer your question. and i won’t. I owe you nothing.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            If you don’t want to provide the basis for the claims you made, that is certainly your choice. Unfortunate that you make claims you can’t support – but certainly your choice. Reminds me a bit of Chicken Little.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            a new name for me. good job. Don’t you have any friends, wife , girlfriend, to keep you busy and off my back. you are taking up space on my line .

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I provided you with no new name. I simply said that your tendency to make broad statements of something horrible happening to everyone without providing any substance for your arguments reminds me of the behavior of Chicken Little.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            better watch the sky is falling . I will never answer your question again so why do you bother.?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            ” I will never answer your question again so why do you bother.?”

            LOL

            You never answered my questions to begin with, therefore you can’t never answer them “again”.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            All I said was 6 years of disruption has made a lot of people suffer. if you cannot take that as truth that is to bad. I made no claims I stated a fact. every is aware of. do not post me again. I do not need the harassment. and that is what it is.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “All I said was 6 years of disruption has made a lot of people suffer.”

            If that was ACTUALLY what you said, then we would have no issue. A lot of people have suffered over the last 6 years. Although I’m unclear what “changes” in the past 6 years have resulted in that suffering.

            But, of course that was NOT what you said. What you said was:

            “change that destroys our pocket books and our lives.”

            Destruction is different than suffering. You use hyperbolic terms.

            “we are a freaking mess.”

            You do not explain what you mean by “freaking mess” and you state that whatever it is, it applies to everyone.

            “So what I am saying is we are all having hard times.”

            Simply false. Not everyone is having “hard times” and there have always been people who, at any time, are facing “hard times”.

            Your comments will carry more credibility if you are able to avoid hyperbole and making statements that include “we”, “our” and “all”, etc., regarding the standing of every single person in a group. You do not speak for everyone, nor is your personal situation indicative of everyone’s.

          • jojo

            thoughtsfromflorida is right….. In the last 6 years I got healthcare, my house value increased by $30,000 after losing that same amount over 6 years ago in the market crash. The best part is I am in the health care field and was able to get a job working for the medical insurance co. due to the increased demands in that field right now handling government based policies. Things are getting so much better then before he took office. You might want to explain how you were negatively effected so that we can understand what your talking about when you say….

            “crap change that destroys our pocket books and our lives”

            I might be missing something but gas, healthcare and jobs were the big one’s.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            That is good for some of you , what about the rest of them and there are a lot more, if you choose to not see that because you are comfortable, have a good life.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            I do not mean to be uncaring but I will not talk to you about what I discussed with Mr, florida. I told him one thing and he insisted I tell him my personal business. And he would not quit. so I will tell you the same thing I told him. I owe you nothing about my personal life. I don’t thin anybody needs to know my financial situation.

          • jojo

            oh, well maybe you should not post your opinions on a public site. People who do not back up what they say almost ALWAYS get scrutinized like this. If you can’t back up what you say, you might not want to post on discussion boards. Just some friendly advice.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            right

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            why would you say that?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Why is it we have to change everything if we say one thing is not right. ”

            You are correct. I overstated the necessary changes. All that would need to be changed would be to remove “public accommodation” from civl rights and anti-discrimination legislation in order to bring about what you suggest. Doing so would allow businesses to turn away any customer for any reason – be it race, age, gender, disability, religious belief, etc., which is what you said you thought should be allowed.

            “Let me say I have had it with change .”

            That’s unfortunate. Change is constant. Always has been. It would behoove you to accept that.

            “We have had change for 6 years and look at us now. we are a freaking mess.”

            What “freaking mess’ are you talking about?

            “you asked about one thing . and I answered you”

            I asked you two questions in my post. You answered neither of them.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            I could see this is going nowhere. gave you my thoughts and you disagreed that is what we do agree , disagree every body has a right too speak. I refuse to have a long worthless discussion.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            If you can’t answer questions about the statements you make, then you can’t. It merely points out the flaws in your thinking. No worries.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            You are the one saying what I supposedly said. why would I answer you. no way.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I have not stated that you said anything other than what you actually said. If you believe otherwise, please point out where I have done that.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            no reason to reply.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Up to you. If you can’t answer basic questions about the statements you make, then you can’t.

          • Trevor

            At some level I agree with you. My white self and black wife would take our money to someone who wants to serve us with a smile. That is part of the relationship between our “free” market and society. Our economic choices as a society strengthen, or change, our cultural ideas. I disagree with your argument about having to repeal all civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation. The American constitution afforded protection in its original form. You have no right to interfere with someone else’s pursuit of happiness, but not at the cost of having to do business with them. The American Constitution had the framework right, but we have corrupted it, in the name of anti-discrimination. This topic has many subcategories, and I do not have the time to cover them all. Nor do I have the time to dissect all of the anti-discrimination movements to show what was done right and what was done ignorantly. I would conclude saying that the government is over-inflated and trying to control many things that it was never intended to control, but we, as lazy Americans want someone else to direct our lives, so we can say I followed the law, even if our actions were immoral.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “My white self and black wife would take our money to someone who wants to serve us with a smile.”

            Certainly your choice. Just as it would be your choice to hold the business accountable for breaking the law.

            “That is part of the relationship between our “free” market and society.”

            The term “free market” refers to the ability of consumers to choose where they do business. It is does not refer to a business being able to turn away customers at their whim.

            “The American constitution afforded protection in its original form.”

            If that was true, then why was the Civil Rights Act put into place? The constitution provides no protection regarding the rules of commerce.

            “we can say I followed the law, even if our actions were immoral.”

            Morality is subjective.

          • Trevor

            My post was in response to a conversation regarding the very laws you are pointing to. Most businesses in America are sole proprietorship’s. They are an extension of the owner, because it is based upon the gifts and abilities of the owner. As is the understanding of business at the time of the founding of America, the business and owner are indistinguishable from each other. That answers your remarks regarding the American constitution being void of commerce.

            A free market is not interfered with by outside forces. The government does not direct or control it in any way. The business owner produces what they want to produce and sell to whomever they want to. If you do not agree with the owners beliefs, you have the right to take your money elsewhere. That is what a free market is. Anything else is not a free market. The American constitution was established to separate government, church, and the people and make the church and government subjugated to the individuals. So instead of the church organization, or government directing the people, the people were to direct the government and church organization. People are the foundation to all of these things and the success of them is dependent on the people participating in them.

            The protection of freedom to live out your beliefs, within your life, including your business, was the protection within the constitution, hence my mention to the distortion/corruption of the people. The Civil Rights Act was put in place because of the ignorance of people and government. It was the government saying that what it has put into writing is the law. When the Constitution ceded to Natural/God’s law as the basis for law, though as always, people chose not to obey. I do not have the time to provide a complete historical lesson of the connections between the Bible, the American Constitution, and the beliefs of the Founders, and how it all worked together.

            Morality is objective, in that it is Natural/God’s Law. People know it is wrong to murder, rape, lie, and steal. Yet people choose to do those things, or make it legally okay, as Muslims do wherever they have control of the government. Morality is only subjective, if you have faith in evolution.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “As is the understanding of business at the time of the founding of America, the business and owner are indistinguishable from each other.”

            Please provide any writings from the time of the founding of America which supports that there was an understanding that “the business and owner are indistinguishable from each other”.

            “That answers your remarks regarding the American constitution being void of commerce.”

            No, it doesn’t. Want would counter my argument regarding the constitution and commerce, would be citing actual portions of the constitution which cover commerce.

            “A free market is not interfered with by outside forces. The government does not direct or control it in any way.”

            Your view of what “free market” means is incorrect. Defined: “A free market is a market system in which the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between sellers and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.”

            A “free market economy” does not mean that the government does not set rules for how businesses operate.

            “The protection of freedom to live out your beliefs, within your life, including your business, was the protection within the constitution”

            There is no protection in the constitution that you are allowed to run your business in any way you care to, to violate laws in the process, and then not to be held accountable for violating those laws based solely upon your religious belief.

            “Morality is objective, in that it is Natural/God’s Law.”

            Morality is defined, by those who have chosen to believe in the Bible, as being what is in the Bible. That one has chosen to believe that the Bible contains God’s Law, does not make it true. That’s why it’s called “faith” and not “fact”.

            “Morality is only subjective, if you have faith in evolution.”

            No, what people choose to view as moral is subjective. Even within the Christian faith there is not common agreement on what is moral and what is not, clearly showing that morality is subjective.

            “Human laws are subjective”

            Absolutely. Fortunately, in the US, we have a constitution which protects citizens from being subject to laws that are created by the whim of the people – for instance laws which prohibit two citizens of the same gender from entering into marriage.

          • Trevor

            So is it okay for 21 Egyptian Christians to be beheaded for their faith? Law established by God is not subjective, people are, which is why human laws are subjective, as well as what people think is okay to do. Just because a “Christian” says it is okay to do something does not mean that it is. They are violating absolutes set by the only objective force in the universe when they say it is okay.

            “Fortunately, in the US, we have a constitution which protects citizens from being subject to laws that are created by the whim of the people – for instance laws which prohibit two citizens of the same gender from entering into marriage.”

            As opposed to the whim of a few radical judges. The people are the force not the few. That is what is set within the constitution.

            And as far as the rest of your arguments as I said before I do not have time to give you a history lesson. If you want to be ignorant so you can believe what you want, go ahead, I am not the one who will receive the consequences for it. I have done my part. You do not learn about anything through a single citation, or source. You have to dive into the reality of what the people thought and how they worked that out in their lives. Learn your history.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “So is it okay for 21 Egyptian Christians to be beheaded for their faith?”

            Not in my view. Nor would the majority of people agree that action is “OK”. Others, however, would view that action as being moral, based upon their beliefs. Hence, morality is subjective.

            “Law established by God is not subjective”

            Since you are referring to the Christian version of God, then of course it is subjective. It is subjective because your belief is subjective. You have chosen to believe that the god of the Bible is the “true” God and thus your beliefs are the “correct” beliefs. Thus your views are subjective.

            “Just because a “Christian” says it is okay to do something does not mean that it is.”

            Conversely, just because a “Christian” says something is not okay to do does not mean that it is.

            “As opposed to the whim of a few radical judges.”

            “Whim” would be inaccurate. Each ruling was well explained using case law.

            What basis do you use for determining that a judge is “radical”?

            Do you believe that citizens should NOT have the right to challenge laws in court and that the judiciary should NOT be empowered to rule on the constitutionality of laws?

            “I am not the one who will receive the consequences for it.”

            What consequences do you believe I will receive based upon what you perceive is a lack of historical knowledge?

            “You have to dive into the reality of what the people thought and how they worked that out in their lives. Learn your history.”

            My knowledge of history is pretty sound. How would a greater understanding of history be useful in forming an opinion regarding present day application of the freedom, liberty, and equality that is guaranteed by our constitution?

          • HarryKrentz

            This genius thinks that morality and truth are whatever pleases you.

          • Trevor

            First, history is the foundation for the documents and founding of this country. So an accurate understanding of history is vital for understanding what the framers of the Constitution meant when they wrote what they wrote. Present day application, as you pointed out is determined by the hundred years of case study, which is contrary to the principles that the founders held. They held that “insert Declaration of Independence”. History shows how the people of that time understood business to work. History shows that the founders believed that the Constitution is not capable of providing a sufficient foundation for any “people” that did not fear God and seek to glorify God with their thoughts, words, and deeds. A right understanding of history shows that lies are being taught about it in schools and that historical revisionism is trying to change what actually was.

            ‘What consequences do you believe I will receive based upon what you perceive is a lack of historical knowledge?’ Here is a quote for you and it has been proven true, time and time again throughout history. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana

            In regards to the rest of your post, I have no real expectation for our society and our government. Not with a majority of the American population thinking that the world revolves around them and whatever it is they want at any given moment. The government is a direct representation of the people and its failures are a result of the failures of the people, one generation to the next.

            My point regarding subjective and objective truth is that apart from an objective source, all law is subjective. So beheading people “can” be okay. You really have no authority to say that it is not. You have no foundation on which to base your views.

          • Thomas Collins Jr June

            No good faithed Christian should ever turn away an interracial couple. I have 4 great biracial grandchildren and 3 Caucasian ones. I’d be up in arms if anyone would discriminate against any of them. Homosexuality, IMHO, is not the same ballgame.

          • Trevor

            I agree on the difference. However, I have no right to force someone to want to provide a service or product to me, unless it is a necessity to life and not something I can get elsewhere. I teach my children to not be oversensitive to people’s beliefs. There are people who do not like my union with my wife, nor our children. I will continue to protect my wife and kids from physical harm, but I will not teach them that they can somehow expect everybody to accept them. I do not care what difference, or perceived difference, exists. Someone will not like someone else. At what point do we accept the reality of sin in the world and learn to not be overly sensitive to the “discrimination” that exists in a fallen world?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “However, I have no right to force someone to want to provide a service or product to me”

            Agree. You cannot force someone to “want” to serve you, nor to accept you nor to like you. The law can, however, require them to serve you without regard to race, creed, gender, disability, religious belief, or any other covered category.

            No one is “forced” to own a business. No business is “forced” to offer certain products. Therefore, no person can be “forced” to violate their beliefs.

            If you believe that businesses should have total discretion in determining who they serve and who they don’t, then you should be working to repeal the public accommodation provisions of all civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation.

          • Trevor

            You should really dive into the definition you provided me regarding free market and understand the implications of it. Here is just the last bit of it. “which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.”

            Government taxation and regulation causes the prices to go up on product/services, thus violating a free market. Said another way, the government reducing demand because of higher prices.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Government taxation and regulation causes the prices to go up on product/services, thus violating a free market. Said another way, the government reducing demand because of higher prices.”

            Since taxation and regulations occurs on the same product for all sellers, the basic premise of a free market system is still in place.

          • Trevor

            The basic premise of free market is a “free” market. Not, what I will call a fair market, as you are describing. Just because everyone has to deal with the same consequences or expectations, does not somehow make it free.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “I’d be up in arms if anyone would discriminate against any of them.”

            So you would be “up in arms’ if a business owner said they would not serve your biracial grandchildren because it is the owner’s sincerely held religious belief that the races should not mix. But if the owner said they wouldn’t serve gay people because of the owner’s sincerely held religious beliefs, that would not be the same ballgame.

            How so?

          • Trevor

            Get your facts straight. The owners in this article served gay people. They refused to make a cake celebrating a union that violates their beliefs. Protected by the Constitution. Check it out. Study the American Constitution, maybe you will learn something. Last point. So I, as a skinhead member can go into a jewish, or black business owners shop and force them to provide a service/product for my, we hate niggers/kikes celebration?

            This is the problem with subjective human law. You have no right to restrict anyone from doing anything because it is entirely a matter of opinion on what is okay to do.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Protected by the Constitution.”

            Over 100 years of judicial rulings disagree with your conclusion. Check them out. Maybe you’ll learn something.

            “So I, as a skinhead member can go into a jewish, or black business owners shop and force them to provide a service/product for my, we hate niggers/kikes celebration?”

            No, you would not be able to do so. Political belief is not a covered category.

            “This is the problem with subjective human law.”

            So you would prefer that we have no laws?

            “You have no right to restrict anyone from doing anything because it is entirely a matter of opinion on what is okay to do.”

            Not simply a matter of opinion. Rather, they are determined based upon the principals of our nation and the constitution.

          • Trevor

            What basis do you have for saying that my beliefs as a skinhead are less protected then my beliefs as a homosexual? Case study does not allow for the fundamental protections of the rights of people to be people. Case study has allowed the murder of millions of people, because they are inconvenient. Where are those people’s rights? The rights endowed by God, to have life? The rights protected that were expressed in the Declaration of Independence and upheld by the Constitution.
            Finally, it not over 100 years of judicial rulings. It is relatively few rulings that have argued the point you are trying to uphold, over the past 100 years since the case study method was instituted by two people at Harvard. More history for you to learn.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            It’s not “case study” – it’s “case law”. And, yes, case law (rulings) for over 100 years have made clear that religious belief is not a valid reason for a business to defy the law.

          • Trevor

            Case study method is the device implemented within acedemia, about 130-140 years ago, which led to case law. A bit of history. Religious belief and its natural outworking into all areas of a person’s life is fundamentally protected by the constitution. As long as your choices do not hurt someone. Though I know you would love to throw that out of their and trample upon the graves of the people who fought to create and protect that very right. Again I will continue to tell people to learn your history. The founders and American citizens lived out the very things they fought to protect. They mass produced Bible’s for the education of the people. They spoke very plainly about the necessity of people to understand their place before God, otherwise the Constitution would not suffice to govern the people. And that is what we have seen.

          • Thomas Collins Jr June

            This to my knowledge does not exist in 2015 in the US, and if it did, I’d make my opinion know and go elsewhere.

          • Julie

            Likewise there are Oregonians who go where they are welcome and do not impose their beliefs or lifestyle on anyone.

            So this situation right away speaks of conflict of interest, political…fake.

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/EyrtheFyre Regina Forbes

          My Grandfather was a small business owner and one of the things he taught me is that if you’re going to refuse someone service, don’t tell them it’s because of your religious or political beliefs. Often you can just get away with “we’re all booked up, I’m sorry.” That not only saves face, but the customer cannot force you to serve them if you’re fully booked. Yes, it does stink to be deceptive, but it’s better than having to explain yourself.

          • Julie

            Smart….but if you note the background, they had crosses on the wall.

            There are Oregon gays who are ashamed of what these two lesbians are doing…

          • Thomas Collins Jr June

            But like Moderate Muslims they are not speaking out. Silence means going along with those for this.

          • Julie

            That is because there is a lack of moral backbone in Oregonian…you can do whatever you want, it is OK….and the intimidation and silencing by the far left and gay radicals

            There is no public dialogue because the local media allows them to abuse and put down with crass attitude and smears anyone who challenges them.

            The gay rights activists are making out it is a Christian problem…note the crosses in the shop…Lesbians picked them out…episcopalians…so called Christians these two are….when in fact heterosexual marriage is anthropological….

            Marriage is institution of any society.

          • Julie

            Yes…agree…and I also consider those muslims who want out of Islam….I read testimonies of those who were killed by their own families for wanting out….or even adopting Western ways…in our country, who were killed within their families while living a moral life…better than seculars I would think.

            So we don’t know how many Muslims would leave Islam if they had the freedom to do so.

          • Trevor

            That is lying, which is not okay, regardless of the situation.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/EyrtheFyre Regina Forbes

            Of course it’s wrong to lie, but in the business world they do it all the time. Try owning your own business, you’ll see how messy it can get. Life ain’t gonna be all unicorns and sunshine my dear little idealist.

          • Oshtur

            Proverbs 12:22.

          • Wraith

            By the way, I am a business owner. I know business ethics, what you people are doing is wrong. If I have a restaurant, I cannot force a Jew to eat pork. Nor that Jew comes into my establishment to demand special treatment. Why delete those statements? Same rule applies here.

          • Trevor

            It is not based of my desire for things to be good, rather, that I choose to be. Few people understand the reality of all the games being played in business and society, but are unwilling to play the game. It is your choice, whether to play along, or accept any consequences for not. I will continue to choose not to play these silly little games. I grew up and decided that games were for people unwilling to stand for Truth.

        • standtall909

          This is my understanding as well Cody.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        “In the original story this bakery never refused gay customers”

        That is a violation of 1 Corinthians 5:9. How are they able to ignore that part of Biblical teaching but then say they can’t make a cake for a same-gender wedding because it violates their religious beliefs?

        Either all-in or all-out. Anything else is hypocrisy, which violates Biblical teachings.

        • Fundisi

          This was within the Church and the man caught in sin had repented and was returned once he saw the errors of his ways.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            So you are saying that the Bible says it is fine for Christians to associate with those who are practicing sexual immorality?

          • Fundisi

            No!

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Well then how are the owners able to rationalize serving gay customers in any way?

          • Fundisi

            There is a difference between serving them, selling them a product and in any way changing that product to celebrate evil or to knowingly sell it for evil purposes, which makes them participants in evil.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “There is a difference between serving them, selling them a product and in any way changing that product to celebrate evil or to knowingly sell it for evil purposes,”

            How so? The Bible makes no such distinction. It covers association only – not degrees of association. If they shouldn’t be associating with sexually immoral people, then they shouldn’t be associating with sexually immoral people. To suggest that it’s OK in certain circumstances of doing business but not in others is both illogical and has absolutely no biblical support.

          • Fundisi

            As you are no Christian, you will forgive me for not accepting your opinion on God’s Word.

            God tells us we are in this world and not part of it, He tells us we cannot avoid doing business with the evil people of this world, or working for them; but, in no way does He ever allow us to knowingly participate in their sins, as we are then sinners with them. If a homosexual of Lesbian buys their product, known or unknown, we are allowed to do such business without judgment; but, when they make it clear that the use of that product is for evil purposes, to serve the devil, as it is with gay marriage, there is no way you can justify their participation in that sin by providing the means of engaging in that sin.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I asked your opinion. You said that the bible does not condone associating with sexually immoral people. Serving people in a business is associating with them. Now you are saying it’s OK to associate with sexually immoral people as long as you are making money doing it. How convenient.

            “God tells us we are in this world and not part of it, He tells us we cannot avoid doing business with the evil people of this world, or working for them; but, in no way does He ever allow us to knowingly participate in their sins, as we are then sinners with them.”

            Based on that, then we can assume that when asked to bake a wedding cake, the bakers inquire as to whether either of the couple has been divorced for reasons other than adultery – and refuse the cake if they have. In addition, if asked to bake a cake for an engagement party, they should inquire whether the couple is having sexual relations – and decline if they are. Further, if asked to make a cake for a baby shower, they should inquire if the mother is married – and decline if she is not. And, of course, if asked to make a cake for a wedding of two atheists, they should refuse as those people are not being married in accordance with the teachings of the Bible.

            You think that was happening? Or were they only applying biblical prohibitions regarding same-gender marriage? It appears to be the latter, which is nothing but prejudicial hypocrisy.

          • Fundisi

            You are so filled with the spirit of the anti-Christ it is pathetic.

            It is my experience and understanding that these people are just doing business, they do not make inquiries of anyone, they just sell their products to the public; but in those cases that have reached the media, the gays/lesbians make their intentions and lifestyle known and thus the Christian, then knowing the purpose must decline. I doubt the people you list in your unchristian defense of homosexuality and gay marriage, don’t discuss these things, they just order what they want and without decorations celebrating their sins. If these militant gays just kept their mouths shut, there would have been no problems; but, they go out of their way to create a conflict, partly hoping to get a pay day and partly because they are enemies of Christ, servants of hell

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Well if not participating in an activity that involves sexual immorality is so important to them, it seems odd they wouldn’t ask people. They are certainly free to ask if they want to. Yet, they don’t. Why? Because they are hypocrites. So spare me the “oh goodness no, we can’t do that because of our religious beliefs” excuse when they only apply it selectively.

          • Fundisi

            When you defend homosexuality, lesbianism and gay marriage, you only prove you are in no position to judge God’s children.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I’m not “judging” anyone. I’m simply stating the fact that by applying their beliefs selectively, the bakers are hypocrites. If they want to be hypocrites, that is their right. No judgement. Simply fact.

          • Fundisi

            You are judging them as being hypocrites, it is not a fact at all, it is just the spirit of the anti-Christ, of Satan in you, wanting to attack Christians that are not liberal and your wanting to defend the God condemned homosexual and lesbian lifestyle choice and the wickedness of gay marriage.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I’m not judging them as hypocrites – they are. They fit the definition perfectly. They profess one thing – we can’t do something because of our faith – but then they only apply to one situation when many others would also violate their faith. They are hypocrites.

            “to defend the God condemned homosexual and lesbian lifestyle choice”

            That you have chosen to believe that the Bible contains an accurate view of what God condemns is certainly your right. But your choosing to believe that is true does not make it definitively true. Unless you ARE God, you do not know for certain what he condemns and what he doesn’t. That’s why it’s called “faith” and not “fact”.

            Are you God, Fundisi?

          • Fundisi

            I have explained the difference, but your defense of homosexuality, lesbianism, gay marriage and probably abortion are driving your hatred and false accusations against these Christian people. Yours is the spirit of anti-Christ.

            Prove me wrong, show men one clear, definitive statement wherein in His Word, God ever says anything supportive of homosexuality, lesbianism and gay marriage, you will not because you cannot. Then show me wherein every utterance in God’s Word against this gross sexually immoral conduct is wrong, show me how He did not say what He clearly said. I know for certain because I study, meditate on and know God’s Word, it is God there speaking to His children.

            No I am not God, but you are your own god, a demigod, judging Almighty God, you are filled with every sort of wickedness and lies.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “I have explained the difference”

            You have provided an explanation of the differences, but your explanation was flawed.

            “Prove me wrong, show men one clear, definitive statement wherein in His Word, God ever says anything supportive of homosexuality, lesbianism and gay marriage, you will not because you cannot.”

            I cannot. Nor can you provide the opposite. That you have CHOSEN to believe that the Bible contains God’s views on the matter, you cannot say so with certainty. It is merely your belief.

            “but you are your own god, a demigod, judging Almighty God, you are filled with every sort of wickedness and lies.”

            No, I am not my own god. What lies have I told?

          • Oshtur

            Paul explicitly said so in 1 Corinthians 5:9-13. They are free to associate with those of this world whose sins are between them and God. They aren’t to treat them as a brother or sister in the church but can sell them a cake just fine.

            Reasonable advice to the Christians of Corinth that was home to the largest temple to Aphrodite in the Empire and the major town industry. Most of their customers were locals working in the temple or tourists there to make all manner of pagan offerings and tributes. Much of what they sold ended up on altars and used in pagan sexual rites. And Paul said not to worry about what pagan use they would use their purchases for wasn’t their concern.

            That’s why this is all messed up – if these were Bible believing Christians they would have just sold them the cake.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Many would disagree with your conclusion.

          • Oshtur

            Really? That is even the orthodox interpretation of that section by multiple mainline Protestant sects. Paul lived in a pluralistic religious environment as we do and was clarifying how Christians were to treat their own contrasted with how they were to deal with ‘those of this world’. And we know this silly ‘same-sex marriage is satanic’ meme wasn’t Paul’s opinion. He thought the religious rituals of pagans were empty and pointless, not demonic – that’s why he saw no theological problem with eating meat that had been used as an offering on a pagan altar. And if that was ok, how even less an issue would be a cake that is merely used in the celebration after the ceremony and has no part in the ritual at all?

            Yes there are marginal sects that think they should isolate themselves from all people of this world but what scriptural basis is there for that considering the life of Jesus?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Really?”

            Yes. Do you not believe that there are many who disagree with your interpretation? It would seem obvious based on comments on this site as well as others.

          • Oshtur

            Yes but they seem to be ‘pick and choose’ Christians for the most part. I think it’s not that they disagree, they are more just oblivious to the majority of things Paul said at all.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “but they seem to be ‘pick and choose'”

            100% agreed.

      • Badkey

        You are a liar. No specific decorations were requested.

        • Fundisi

          When you Leftist, pro-gay folk call people liars rather than suggest they may be wrong, have made an error, you do not deserve an answer.

          • Churchj5

            Says the person calling people liberal liars left and right in this thread. I’m not going to call you a liar, but you are wrong, and too caught up in your own cognitive dissonance to admit it.

          • Fundisi

            If I call someone a liar without evidence that they knew differently and deliberately decided to say what they knew to be wrong – I apologize and will be more careful. I may have made an error here, as you may recall there have been several other bakeries and businesses in recent years caught up in this mess and I could have mixed them up and made an error in the facts as to this case. If so I apologize for the error, which was unintentional.

          • Oshtur

            Isn’t false witness false witness? Either you speak the truth or don’t. And spreading gossip is no less a sin.

            You stereotype and slander entire groups and then point fingers at other people’s specks. Might want to clear out those timbers first.

      • SFBruce

        Nonsense. Of course, they discriminated. The only issue is the basis of that discriminate: was it against an idea of against someone’s sexual orientation? I agree with the judge who essentially said it’s a distinction without a difference.

        • Fundisi

          He has a constitutional right to discriminate against anyone or anything that violates his freedom of religious expression. The judge was anti-Christ.

          • SFBruce

            No he doesn’t. No right is absolute, including religious expression. You’ve already acknowledged that human sacrifice can’t be defended by religious freedom, but it goes much further than that. Someone may sincerely believe the races shouldn’t mix, but if he owns a restaurant, he’s going to have to serve all races.

          • Fundisi

            Immutable characteristics like skin color and willful sexual immoral conduct are not comparable, sexual deviancy is not a Civil Rights issue.

          • Oshtur

            What sexual behavior is happening at a cake purchase or a wedding or its reception for that matter?

          • Fundisi

            Lesbianism and Homosexuality is all about immoral, wicked, deviant sexual conduct. But, your not being a Christian, you would never admit it is a sin.

          • Oshtur

            You wouldn’t recognize a Christian one walked up to you and gave you a hug.

            This is pointless you are in your own little world devoid of Spirit, Grace, reason and common sense. I’ve no more pearls for you, you don’t understand the situation and have no desire to learn. May God have mercy on you.

          • Fundisi

            I already have and rejoice in Gods Mercy, I am born again of His Spirit, in Spirit I have already entered into eternal life with God.

            This is pointless you are in your own little world devoid of Holy Spirit,
            of Grace, reason and common sense. I’ve no more pearls of Divine Wisdom or Spiritual food for you, you don’t understand the situation and have no desire to learn. May God have mercy on you.

            You cannot provide any scriptures to back up your beliefs, you refuse to condemn homosexuality, lesbianism and gay marriage as being sins, you constantly attack and oppose Christians and in every way show you do not know Christ.

          • SFBruce

            At least you’ve dropped your claim that the right to religious freedom is absolute. Contrary to your opinion, those who actually study sexual orientation believe it’s largely fixed by circumstances outside our control. That aside, Oregon law clearly bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, and the Kleins broke that law.

      • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

        This version of the story printed here appears to settle the matter for me.

        With public accommodations laws, a business owner doesn’t have to do anything that’s not within his ordinary business. In addition, public accommodations laws don’t cover specialized work or works of art or performances.

        So if, for instance, a gay couple wanted a cake decorated with “Sodomy is fantastic!” and with figures of the happy couple on top, the public accommodations laws likely would not cover that.

        The problem is that according to this story here, they never got that far. The business owner turned them down when it was discovered that it was a gay person seeking a wedding cake.

        Whether or not someone thinks business owners should be able to refuse service to gay people, it at least puts it more firmly inside traditional public accommodations law.

        • Wraith

          It might settle the issue for you, not for the rest of us, we disagree, as I stated, this is far from over. You knowing law & being an activist, what makes you think that we are just passive…

        • Wraith

          It might settle the issue for you, not for the rest of us, we disagree, as I stated, this is far from over. You knowing law & being an activist, what makes you think that we are just passive… Yeah, they might bankrupt the bakery, but you know, you people are making enemies for free, you are not winning hearts, in that resides your mistake. You will never win following this path.

          • Oshtur

            Unfortunately its the law and the constitution, both federal and state. There is no way a business can make an invitation to do business to the general public by advertising and then pull out a religious test they or their usage must pass to buy the advertised product. There literally isn’t a way that can work with the first amendment and the Oregon state constitution – there is no way to put one citizens right to religious freedom above another, it has to be a stalemate.

            And so then the courts have to go to the next question – who initiated the commercial relationship? Since it was the business by advertising every single time this case goes to court it decides for the customer. They took the business up on their offer and had no reason to expect there to be unconstitutional conditions on making their purchase.

            Please, explain to me how a business can constitutionally and legally engage in religious discrimination after making a public offer. When you realize it is impossible you will realize why these cases inevitably lead to these results.

          • Wraith

            No, don’t compare the constitution with you law, they are two different things. The U.S. Constitution does not mention NOTHING about same gender unions or sodomy at all. 1st amendment does protect freedom of faith, a faith that these fine people are violating. Plus, no Founding Father recognized same gender unions as being legitimate, & we do follow the principles of the founding fathers.

            This movement is a 21st century movement following humanistic ideals. The only problem that I do have with it is that it does promote the normalization of a practice that does self harm the State by depopulating the State itself. The idea of a family nucleus is to preserve the State, the only nucleus that preserves the States is the traditional family nucleus, a man & a woman, there is no other way.

            I hate to bring religion to discuss this topic, I don’t religion to argue this at all. I do bring biology, & even natural selection does state that in order to preserve the species, creatures from various species have to follow natural laws of biology & anatomy.

          • Oshtur

            You are missing the issue, this has nothing to do with ‘sodomy’, this is about a customer whose beliefs include same-sex marriage and a business owners who don’t. This is religious discrimination by the business in a public offering and the universal right to religious freedom shields the customer from such acts of licentiousness.

          • Wraith

            No, I am missing the issue, you don’t get it at all, we are not willing to comply with laws that we perceive to be unjust. Especially because we know that you people are changing the Constitution as you see fit. We know that our government has been infiltrated by radical liberals that are making radical social changes. Those changes do follow an agenda. Again, why should I consider same gender unions as family nucleus? If I know that such a practice does entirely omit the natural order of human biology for self preservation of the species, & even of the State.

          • Wraith

            It cannot settle the issue for us because we also think about the kids of America, especially those under the care of LGBTQ. You people neglect to mention the abuses made by the LGBTQ parents, & we do have documentation, but disqus keeps deleting it. You people cover up tracks.

          • Oshtur

            Washington state DSHS CPS has been tracking same-sex parents and foster parents for decades – they are better parents than opposite-sex ones statistically. I bet you are going to point out anecdotal individual cases? no Christian stereotypes, it’s just a form of slander, first In the list of things God hates.

          • Wraith

            & what about the articles that I posted Oshtur, the ones that I posted & you people deleted? The articles that spoke about those adults that were adopted by same parents, went to court, & spoke about it? What happened to those articles? Or the articles that do report abuse from them? Why conceal that information to the public? I do ask you.

          • Oshtur

            No one deleted your posts, they don’t actively remove postings here that I’ve seen. You used a word that was on their ‘review’ list is most likely the case. The one I run into is sexes without the final -es which is ridiculous of course.

          • Wraith

            & yet, those postings are not here, we on this side of the screen cannot find them at all. I already asked some friends to check it out, & they don’t see them as well. How convenient. Should I post them again, just to try? Again, they are news articles about the experiences of adults that were adopted by same couples, & the reasons why they are against it. Their voices matter for us as well. The voices of children matter for us because your friend & LGBTQ advocate Katy did state that children didn’t have voices or rights when it comes to adoption. Our children matter to us, especially if we do have reports of abuse & have the prove & paperwork to prove it.

          • Wraith

            Sigh… why is it that I don’t believe you… i wish I could believe you, but I can’t, several people on this side are corroborating what we are posting, & we just don’t see it being posted at all.

          • Wraith

            As for God, the Torah in the book of Genesis is clear, He did create man & woman. I will not contend with that, nor supersede that at all. You are the one that doesn’t get it all, & for that, you will have to stand in front of Him & explain because He is our judge, not us, but He, & we will be accountable for everything that we do in this existence. I am not an exception either.

          • Oshtur

            And in the body of Christ there is no male or female and in the next world there will be no marry or marriage, we will be as the Angels in heaven.

            Don’t mistake instructions for Adam and Eve as being for everyone.

          • Wraith

            & still the Torah does state within the 10 commandments that a man shall not lay with another man. The Torah in the book of genesis does state that He created a man & a woman, not a man & an another man. Which you know that would had caused the extinction of the human race, of course, biologically speaking.

          • Wraith

            But then again, Jesus the Christ did acknowledge in his own teachings that man will leave his parents to be united with his woman, & they shall be one flesh. It is scriptural. As for the other one, the commandment of the Highest is quite clear, go onto the world & multiply, that is the sole purpose of matrimony. The other one, your alternative, just cannot produce offspring at all.

          • Oshtur

            Again you seem to arguing under the Old dead Law. Sorry we know from God the reason Christians marry is because thise who didn’t get the gift of celibacy are to marry to avoid lust. And there is no male or female in the body of Christ, couples of all sexes marry just fine.

            You are, of course, free to believe as you will just as I have that right and the government can’t treat one of our beliefs as any different than the others.

          • Wraith

            The law pertaining matrimony as being between man & woman still applies today. Family nucleus is between man & woman, which can produce offspring in order to sustain the State. Your alternative cannot sustain the State because no matter what you do, the biology is just not there to produce offspring. & yes, it is their choice by free will, not because they don’t have the biology to do so.

            The idea of family nucleus is to sustain the State, to replenish the State, to produce the future generations of labor, taxpayers, soldiers that defend the State. The unions that you promote have by force to find other sources of getting children because that is something they cannot produce themselves, & you know it all too well, don’t you?

            You can believe your fabrications about matrimony, but I clearly understand why ancient civilizations did establish matrimony that way, following human biology laws, & that was to preserve the State intact, as it is.

            Your alternative is social suicide in the long run because States do grow old & they eventually die out. Your alternative does promote the social suicide of the State itself.

          • Oshtur

            Haha! 20% of married women never breed and your obsessing about 1% of the population and still can’t give a single constitutional reason to support the business in this case.

            You are wasting your time.

          • Wraith

            Keep laughing all you want. You cannot sustain a State with your group, & you know that. We can prove it to you scientifically. Accept my challenge & you can keep your LGBTQ friends in your own composed State just to see what will happen a couple of years from now.

          • Oshtur

            Fifth grade thinking, as if any reasonable person would even want all members of a society to be the same. You argue like a Jesuit and that isnt a compliment.

          • Wraith

            The Pope is a Jesuit, not me… you sound like a 2 year old that doesn’t understand the consequences of social movements in the long run. You are the one taxing my time. Your movement cannot survive without straight people, your movement cannot survive without the original family nucleus either, & yes, it is scientifically proven. Your LGBTQ movement is a group of people sterile by choice, which you people perceive as a right, & which is not. No I am not interested on arguing like a Jesuit, but we do care about our children, the ones that you time & again omit to mention in this forum, because you people want to indoctrinate them in your ways, & parents do have the right to form them as they see fit. So many children are right now in the grasp of LGBTQ parents, & you people omit to mention the cases in which abuse & even sexual abuse has occurred. The fact that you also want to punish those that disagree is also troublesome for us. You people already overstepped the line, & we are here to face you.

          • Oshtur

            Yeah paranoid persecution complex.

            You will of course list all the opposite-sex couples that treat children badly, right?

            Again my state has been monitoring same-sex parents and foster oarents for decades, proportionally they are lower risk than opposite-sex ones.

            Worry about the 98% first.

          • Wraith

            No, it’s not paranoia, quite simple, we are here because we are witnessing how a Christian baker is being punished because he won’t bake a wedding cake for people that he perceives not to be marriage. That is the entire issue here. A similar case happened in New Mexico. Then again, the incident in Chick Fil-A, or Duck Dynasty, or what happened to the Mozilla Firefox CEO. Not paranoid, you people demand special treatment, & we are witnessing the injustices you are committing against others just to get accommodated, even against the free wills of other, you don’t care who you step or stump with your feet, as long as your movement succeeds. You cannot do without the rest of the 98% especially if you are only 1%. You anger the 98% what do you think will happen to your small movement of people?

          • Oshtur

            Then what are you concerned about?

          • Wraith

            We are concern about you, people like you, with your types of ideologies & immoral twisted sense of justice. You people taking freedom of speech & freedom of religion in the false name of political correctness & multiculturalism, doctrines that clearly don’t work outside the borders of the United States. We are concern about you people changing the fabric of our society & making it a free for all thinking that your actions won’t have consequences. You people are the ones that good & evil don’t exist, you people state that those concepts are relative, but unfortunately for all of us, they do exist, & yes, they do have consequences. We are watching how you are taking freedom of speech & freedom of faith, thinking that you are right, but your cause is social suicide of an entire community of peoples just because you guide your lives in misguided passions of the flesh that you people cannot control or dominate at all.

          • Wraith

            Government forcing peoples accept things that go against our conscious. So what’s next? Receiving a biometrical microchip in the forehead or the right hand? One that without you would become an outlaw to the eyes of the State?

          • Oshtur

            Nobody forced this business to offer wedding cakes for sale to the general public.

          • Wraith

            Your movement is new, although the concept of homosexuality is not. In the past everyone understood that family meant man & woman. You people are changing that. You are not only accusing him of selling a product that is widely understood to be for a traditional wedding, you are attempting to shut down his business. That is a social injustice. This man has the right to his faith, & he also has the right to disagree with the term matrimony if he wishes to defend traditional matrimony for that matter. Nobody forced this business to offer wedding cakes, but you are forcing him to accept homosexuality as the norm, & I don’t even accept, much less recognize homosexuality as family nucleus because it’s NOT! A Nucleus produces a product, that product is an offspring, the offspring is the one that regenerates the ranks of the State. You people promote social suicide. & the corruption of minors as well by normalizing homosexuality as the norm. Parents do have the right to raise their children as they see fit, & the State has no business imposing their liberal progressive views about sexuality & matrimony to its own citizens. Matrimony is between a man & a woman, homosexuals are not matrimony.

          • Oshtur

            Whatever. You will discuss anything other than the legalities of this case. You don’t want to live in America with its constitutions and laws you are free to leave.

          • Wraith

            Oshtur, I am not going anywhere, I am a U.S. veteran, fought for this country. Fought for the freedom of this country, a thank you will suffice. But I am not going anywhere at all, & you, a civilian will not force me. I earn my right to stay in this country by own effort, & I do have the more than the right to express my thoughts because I fought to keep freedom in this country, so you should review your words Oshtur.

          • Oshtur

            I’m a veteran too, small world. Then it’s odd you don’t know how US law and constitutions work. Again, the business shouldn’t have engaged in religious discrimination in a publi offer, it’s inherently unconstitutional and legally impossible.

          • Wraith

            No, not small world, you don’t talk trash to a brother in arms, you should know, unless you are stolen valor. I know exactly how U.S. law works, you are not going to give me a lecture on that, but then again, obama jumps not only the constitution, but also congress, & if you are like him, then it is easy for you to also try to supersede what already has been established. it is because of people like you that I stopped going to church altogether. You are taking his right to freedom of faith, you know he cannot participate in the ritualistic ceremony of marriage if it goes against his faith, & you know it.

            Don’t ever talk to me about leaving this country ever again, or you & I will have a serious discussion about your loyalties commie/pinko.

            As for the baker, it is the interpretation of the judge because there is nothing about your unions in the U.S. Constitution, or anything about conducting business your fashion. So you are a lie as well rewards the U.S. Constitution. As a matter of fact, let me challenge you right now to find what you state & post it here about the U.S. Constitution, post it here so that everyone can read it. Come on, I do challenge you. Post it, otherwise you are all words, no substance.

          • Oshtur

            This from the guy who’s been talking trash all day long. Sorry they’re not participating in the ceremony the Supreme Court just ruled on this in the city of Greece. The atheists tried to say having a prayer was making them participate in a religious ceremony and the Supreme Court said “no, if you aren’t praying you aren’t participating.” And considering the wedding cake has nothing to do with the wedding ceremony at all that’s game, set, match.

            Again the business shouldn’t be offering anything to the public they can’t sell to people of all beliefs.

          • Wraith

            There is no mention of LGBTQ unions in the U.S. Constitution, your interpretation of the constitution is flawed & erroneous. & yes, I do have a college education.

          • Oshtur

            Who doesn’t? Since this is about religious discrimination and the customer’s have a right to beliefs that include same-sex marriage your comment is irrelevant and oddly off topic.

          • Wraith

            How about gay discrimination against people of faith? How do you account for that? I mean, we do have videos in which gay people do attack Christians. What about that? You & your bogus religious discrimination.. yes, the customer has the right to believe whatever they want, but the customer does not have the right to force himself/herself, his/her views, & believes against the will of the business owner. A Muslim cannot force you to make become part of a ritualistic ceremony if you don’t want to & goes against your own principles. The same applies here. Your comments are your own personal opinionated thoughts.

          • Oshtur

            You don’t know what you are talking about. A business doesn’t have to put hate speech on a cake which is what was asked in all these cases. This case is about a customer being rejected for their own beliefs before a cake and what type they wanted was even discussed.

            You just don’t understand the basics.

          • Oshtur

            No one forced the business to offer something to the public they wouldn’t legally sell.

          • Oshtur

            And in the body of Christ there is no male or female and in the next world there will be no marry or marriage, we will be as the Angels in heaven.

            Don’t mistake instructions for Adam and Eve as being for everyone.

          • Oshtur

            And if you perceive the first amendment to be ‘unjust’ then I don’t know where to go from there. Are you going to leave the US? Repeal the religious protections of the first amendment? The religious protections of the Oregon state constitution?

            The customers have a constitutional right to have beliefs that include same-sex marriage and to act on those beliefs. Exactly how are you going to respect that right and endorse religious discrimination by a business with a public offering?

          • Wraith

            Nope, I never stated that the 1st amendment is unjust, you people are attempting to supersede the Constitution, which is quite different. We support the 1st amendment, you on the other hand want to change it, or even get rid of it. You people are twisted, especially you, you who I have encounter before. You put words that I have never mentioned at all. I am not going to leave the U.S., I am a U.S. veteran, have fought for this country, & I have the right to express what I do perceive is a social injustice. I don’t want to repeal the religious protections at all, I am trying to preserve them. You people, on the other hand, want to repeal them because you are forcing a baker to bake a wedding cake for those that go against his faith.

          • Oshtur

            No he wants to make offers to the public and then ignore their right to religious freedom. A moral bakery wouldn’t be offering a product to the general public if they couldn’t be sold to people of all beliefs.

            But it’s clear you don’t know what the legal issues involved are which is why you don’t understand the rulings when they come down.

            Again explain to me how the business can religiously discriminate against a customer taking them up on an offer constitutionally?

            There simply is no way to do that no matter how much you wish there were a way.

          • Wraith

            In the past people were not forced to bake a wedding cake for same gender couples, that has changed, & it seems that it will still change. You will force peoples of faith to relocate, or do another sort of activity. You think that they will not notice at all? You think that they will not organize? & yet, you don’t offer bacon to a Muslim, your comment is quite hypocritical. To the extent of my knowledge, no Muslim goes asking for bacon to a public restaurant. No Jew goes asking for pork in a public restaurant if they don’t want to. No Hindu goes asking for cow into a public restaurant in the U.S., & yet you people are forcing others to do your bidding. You are a hypocrite.

          • Wraith

            I also conduct business, I have a small business, but to the extent of my knowledge, no Jew or Muslim goes to a restaurant demanding to eat pork, that goes against their faith. No establishment forces a Jew or Muslim to eat Pork if it goes against their faith & goes into a restaurant. Only the LGBTQ movement seeks to make a point by forcing a bakers & wedding photographers & planners to serve them a gay wedding cake. How convenient.

            The point is, no restaurant owner forces pork on Jews & Muslims, & no Jew or Muslim demands special treatment when they go into a restaurant.

          • Oshtur

            So you don’t even understand the issue. This isn’t about asking a business to sell something they haven’t advertised for sale. This is about a customer wanting an advertised product that the last customer might have bought but being tefused because they didn’t pass a religious test by someone at the business.

            Either the business sells wedding cakes to the public or it doesn’t. If it does it can’t rescind the offer because it doesn’t like the customer’s beliefs – in this case their beliefs about same-sex marriage.

          • Wraith

            I understand the issue, & I also understand how you people are twisting it. You see, as a business they should serve everyone. I understand that. The only problem is, & this is the issue, bakers do bake wedding cakes, & photographers take pictures & even video in weddings, as well as planners plan weddings as well. The conflict becomes real when those people are people of faith & they don’t recognize people of the same as marriage.

            I already told you why I cannot recognize them as family nucleus, it is not because they are not individuals, it is not because they are not human, it is not because they don’t have rights, it is because they lifestyle not only goes against laws of human biology, but it weakens the State. Moral law was established since the beginning of time to preserve a certain order, a certain balance, withing the social cluster. Traditional family nucleus preserves the State by increasing the numbers of the exist within the State. You people don’t get this at all, you people want to accommodate these people neglecting natural factors, & even social factors as well. Yes, a business sells cakes, but you cannot force an individual that truly practices a faith into selling a wedding cake to someone that he or she cannot recognize as being a legitimate union. They will take the path that Daniel or Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego did take. You on the other hand already submitted your will to this system of things. You have become a slave to a corrupt progressive liberal system, which is attempting to destroy moral values, & one of them is the traditional family nucleus, which preserves & perpetuates the State itself. You don’t get it. It does goes beyond simply serving someone, you people are attacking the faith of others by nullifying the 1st amendment. In that sense, this all progressive liberal judicial system has become corrupted.

            If you truly are a Christian as you claim to be, then you must recognize that there is a Higher Authority over men, & that Authority does supersede the authority of men. You already have placed aside that Higher Authority to adopt the flawed authority of men, & men does make mistakes, & men is corruptible. Sad to say, but you have preferred to adopt the true nature of men, & subjugate yourself to the system of things of this world. Scriptural speaking, you have been subdued to another master, & you haven’t notice, or you don’t care…

          • Oshtur

            Again I don’t care about your long convoluted reasons why you think people should be able to act unconstitutionally. And you obviously can’t offer an way how this business is acting constitutionally so we are done.

            Either live within the constitutions or change it. Advocating anarchy doesn’t help your case v

          • Wraith

            & we don’t care about your unjust impositions because you people are not following democratic protocol at all. You see our republic is still a democratic republic, We the People do have a say so on moral issues, & if We the People say no, then it is NO to moral wrongs. I cannot accept an unjust imposition such as this one knowing that the people of California & other States of this Union voted NO to those sorts of unions. Obviously, an non-elected body of government, such as the judicial system had to overturn the voices of the People. It was the only way. But since you people decided not to respect the votes of We the People, then we are not oblige to comply. The U.S. Constitution does NOT mention anything about same buddies marriage at all. So you are deceiving people.

          • Oshtur

            You really don’t understand this issue at all! This case has nothing to do with the civil contract titled marrisge, it was about a wedding and a reception that need have no contract at all.

            When you can figure out how a budiness can constitutionally religiously discriminate in a public offer get back to me. Until then you will lose every time these cases go to court.

          • Wraith

            The baker has the right to preserve his faith. The baker has the right to NOT recognize those unions. The State has to respect that decision based on his faith, & it cannot do anything to take that away by forcing him to go against his faith. The baker can bake them another form of cake, not a wedding cake. His right is protected by the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution, freedom of faith, which existed way before this movement. We also hold the same moral values & principles as the Founding Fathers of this nation, which clearly understood the meaning of the family nucleus.

          • Oshtur

            No they have a right to their own actions, they have no right to treat s customer as if they share their beliefs, their right to religious freedom stops at the tip of the customers nose where theirs begins.

            Again if they didn’t want to do business with people of all faiths they wouldn’t have made a public offer.

          • Wraith

            That’s not what the 1st amendment states, let’s review the 1st, shall we?

            Amendment I

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

            Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the “wall of separation between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.

            “We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.” –Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Virginia Baptists, 1808. ME 16:320

            “The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights.” –Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1819. ME 19:416

            “Among the most inestimable of our blessings, also, is that… of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support.” –Thomas Jefferson: Reply to John Thomas et al., 1807. ME 16:291

            “In our early struggles for liberty, religious freedom could not fail to become a primary object.” –Thomas Jefferson to Baltimore Baptists, 1808. ME 16:317

            “Religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted.” –Thomas Jefferson to P. H. Wendover, 1815. ME 14:283

            “One of the amendments to the Constitution… expressly declares that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,’ thereby guarding in the same sentence and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press; insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others.” –Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. ME 17:382

            “The rights [to religious freedom] are of the natural rights of mankind, and… if any act shall be… passed to repeal [an act granting those rights] or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right.” –Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. (*) ME 2:303, Papers 2:546

            you people are taking his freedom of faith away from him. he cannot recognize your unions based on his faith.

          • Oshtur

            You have just given my case massive support. Yes the customer’s right to believe in same-sex marriage is inviolate, once the business made the invitation the possibility of religious discrimination became constitutionally and therefore legally impossible. The business shouldn’t have ever offered something to the public they could only sell to those passing a religious litmus test.

            Thanks for supporting my case.

          • Wraith

            Those people cannot force him to acknowledge them as marriage. It goes against his faith, & his faith is protected by the 1st. I’ll keep reminding you that fact. The State cannot force him to go against his faith.

          • Oshtur

            No one asked them to, just as Catholics don’t have to acknowledge civil divorces or the legitimacy of civil marriages. These were just customers buying a wedding cake, a type of thing, that the business freely offered for sale to the general public.

            And the business would offer something for sale that went against their faith so obviously selling wedding cakes doesn’t do so.

          • Wraith

            Oh! But you are forcing them, the fact that you want to force this baker to bake a wedding cake for their wedding means that you are forcing him to acknowledge against his will, against his faith, that they are matrimony. You see them as customers, we disagree with your view. To the extent of my knowledge, this baker won’t offer wedding cakes anymore because of this incident.

            This baker, he doesn’t stand alone, I don’t recognize the unions that you are promoting to be family nucleus at all. No matter what you state, no matter what government states, no matter what the judicial system states, it goes against the biology of men, & if you want to go deeper into topic such as religion, God could had created two men & give them the biology to procreate, but clearly he made a division between man & woman. One cannot exist without the other. You people are tempering with the idea of men coexisting only with men & women coexisting only with women, & that is even a biological dead end.

          • Oshtur

            No one forced the bakery to offer wedding cakes for sale to the general public so your rant, as always, falls apart.

          • Wraith

            & yet, you are forcing the baker to bake a wedding cake to two guys that want to be acknowledge as marriage, even against the free will & conscious of this man. No, my argument doesn’t fall apart, you don’t get it, you are not majority, you will never be majority, & you will never get accepted by imposition or by force, the only thing you are provoking is enemies among the rest of the people that don’t perceive you as marriage. How long do you think that they stand by doing nothing about it?

          • Oshtur

            No they offered to sell wedding cakes to the general public, no one forced anyone to do that. And the business owner knew they couldn’t religiously discriminate against thise taking them up on the offer before they made it.

          • Wraith

            Your attack on this baker is a direct attack on the rest of us as well. You are telling us how to conduct business, us, the business owners, the ones that know who to do business with. Your imposition is not welcomed at all. You are not going to tell the rest of us how to conduct our business with others. Or whom do we do business with. You pretty much are shutting down his operation, who are you to do that to him? It is personal to the rest of us. He has the right NOT to recognize them as matrimony, as I have the right to state that they are NOT matrimony either. & you are not going to shut own our operations either just because you don’t like what I state.

          • Oshtur

            The baker attacked the customer’s – you’ve got it backwards as usual n

          • Wraith

            No he didn’t. Oshur, you are very scandalous, all of you from the LGBTQ movement are not only scandalous, but also narcissists. The world, reality does NOT revolve around you people. No, the baker refused to participate, or be part of a ceremony which the baker perceives to be wrong. He did decline to bake a wedding cake for them, that is all. He did offer to bake any other cake. Which they refuse. You really want a clear example of a true attack because of radical religion? The Charlie Hedbo assault to that facility by radical extremists is an attack to peoples expression their opinion, which is wrong. & yes, this is coming from a U.S. war veteran that has seen action abroad, & know, & understands that things are not the same outside U.S. borders. Your liberal philosophies & ideologies don’t apply in the real world, only inside your head.

          • Wraith

            You have no religious backing, much less scientific basis to state that you can sustain a nation with your group.

          • Oshtur

            Hahahaha! You are a hoot!

          • Wraith

            & you stating what you state about homosexuals truly makes you a joto, for those that know what I mean… I do defy you because I know you are not telling the truth, you have no religious backing, much less scientific backing to support your argument. Quite simple, remain with a State that only has LGBTQ members, exclude the straights from your community, & we shall see the long term consequences of your community & how they evolve, if they can evolve at all as a nation of all LGBTQ.

          • Wraith

            That was before your movement stepped in, your movement is new, you were not consider matrimony in the past, & personally, I cannot consider you matrimony either because you are outside the biological norm serves a purpose, & that purpose is the self preservation of the species, & even of the State because without populace, you cannot have a State at all. You promote control of population through LGBTQ & abortion, in the false gaze of human rights, & you are attempting to impose that to the rest of us using the court system. You are punishing this man, you are punishing a New Mexico photographer, you attempted to punish Chick-Fil-A, Duck Dynasty, & you did punish Firefox Mozilla CEO by firing him. So yes, you are forcing yourselves against the will of the rest of us.

          • Wraith

            It would be very interesting to see your people try to force a Muslim baker to bake a wedding cake for your couples, in this very nation, the U.S.

          • Oshtur

            A Muslim bakery would have just made the cake. Neighborhood muslim caterer has done same-sex wedding receptions, it’s not a sin to sell to sinners – every Christian knows that.

          • Wraith

            Really… go & try it… see what will happen… maybe you can sue them as well, & we shall see the reaction of the Muslim world. Maybe you will have yet another episode like Charlie Hedbo episode in France with them. Don’t speak for a group you don’t have control over. Your political correctness will be your own undoing.

          • Oshtur

            Go try what? People buy wedding cakes from muslim owned bakeries all the time. They just don’t religiously discriminate.

          • Wraith

            You know exactly what I mean, that is, before you people decided to delete my postings. Keep your LGBTQ brethren without any sort of traditional families in this nation, & we shall see what will happen to your populace over time. It is quite simple, that is the challenge.

            As for your statement, I haven’t seen any gay couple attempt to buy a wedding cake from a Muslim owned bakery, they even don’t dare to go into one of those establishments. Ah! But alas! Your LGBTQ brethren know exactly were to go, it had to be a Christian owned business.

            I don’t believe you at all, Muslims are very zealous about their faith, especially when it comes to homosexuals & the topic of homosexuality.

          • Wraith

            “I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another.” –Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1799. ME 10:78

          • Oshtur

            Exactly! There can be no winner between the religious rights of anyone at the business and the customer – that Is constitutionally a wash.

            So the next question is who initiated the business relationship? Why the business by advertising to the general public. That is why every court rules for the customer in even the most conservative state.

            There is no right to religious discrimination in a public offer, the customer’s right to religious freedom shields them from such acts of licentiousness.

          • Wraith

            Religious rights came first, way first than your movement. We do recognize the legitimacy of the 1st amendment pertaining freedom of speech, & freedom of religion. Your movement… well… that we don’t recognize at all. We stand by the same principles that the Founding Fathers of the United States of America established originally, not your 21st century humanistic, progressive, liberal, interpretation of the law.

          • Wraith

            Clearly, you are not a Christian, or if you are, you are also trying to supersede what is written in the Book. I am not Christian, & yet I know scripture, & I know enough to know that some people of faith will take the same rout that Daniel took when he was thrown into the lion’s pit. Or the decision taken by Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego , who were thrown into the fire pit defying the king’s royal edict to bow down in front of a false god. Knowing this, & knowing some Christians, I know with all certainty that you will not change their faith, nor their resolution, even if government passes laws that these people perceive as unjust.

            & again, I am not a Christian, & I don’t go to church on Sunday morning. But know enough to know that there are certain things that you will not change.

          • Oshtur

            Clearly you don’t understand Scripture or God’s will. I am a Christian and there is no restriction on Christians from doing business with people of this world, what they do with their purchases are between them and God. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13)

            And if someone mistakenly thought they couldn’t sell something to people of all faiths they just wouldn’t it offer it for sale to the general public, simple as that.

            Again you obviously haven’t a clue about the legal issues involved and are arguing emotionally rather than rationally.

            Again explain how a business can constitutionally religiously discriminate in a public offer and we can continue.

          • Wraith

            On the contrary, some of you are attempting to change scripture to fit your agenda. There are so many citations that do speak against homosexuality, but I am pretty sure that so many of the people in this discussion have already cited them to you. No need to give them again, & again, all over, to you, you just won’t listen at all. Plus, I am not a religious person either. I know theology, I studied theology for several years. You are not going to lecture me about Scripture. There are no restrictions on Christians doing business with others, that is true, but Scripture does forbid homosexual conduct.

            Obviously, I know what you are talking about in legal terms, but then again, law makers are not biologists, nor scientists. & you sir, or madam whatever may be the case, you are defying the laws of biology for the self preservation of the species. Knowingly or unknowingly, you are promoting population control by free will among peoples, in the false gaze of human rights. Again, what can 2 gay men or 2 lesbian woman do in the long run for the State? They will not produce offspring, they can adopt, if the conditions of the social cluster are optimal, but if that changes, & the State suffers a contingency, you in the end will not supersede the laws of biology, nature will take its course without you, people will adopt to reorganize, & to for a new State, & laws will change again.

          • Wraith

            You are a moral wrong. Liberalism is not Biblical & you know it. This nation will not prosper with liberal ideals.

          • Oshtur

            Your opinions are not scripturally based so they make no never mind to me. I see no hint of the Spirit or its fruits in your missives so there ya go – God will arbitrate as it should be.

            Your ramblings have nothing to do with the issue at hand, religious discrimination by a business in a public offering. Until you can explain s constitutional way to make that happen we’ve got nothing to discuss.

          • Wraith

            Yours is truly an opinion, a wrong opinion, an opinion that the rest of us are not willing to follow, not even if you attempt to impose. Again, I can provide scriptural cites to refute you, & as a matter of fact I have provided scripture cites for this site, but you people, you so called Christians, but most likely progressives, have omitted to allow those citations to stand in your web site. God is good, God is love, but God is also true justice, & you will be judged for knowing the truth & lying to people.

          • Wraith

            You have no scriptural basis to support homosexuals. Clearly Genesis does state that God created Man & Woman… Gee… I wonder why…

          • Wraith

            If it is written it is Biblical, any theologian can tell you that, & if not, then it is your own personal opinion Oshtur, like your own opinion that homosexuality is O.K. scriptural speaking.

          • Wraith

            Oh! One more thing Oshtur, if you think that you can support LGBTQ & be a Christian at the same time, you are wrong, not only you are not a Christian, you are an apostate & an anathema as well for twisting faith. As for commerce, you as a businessman cannot force a Jew or Muslim to consume pork, & they won’t ask for pork either, only LGBTQ want to force people of faith to serve them something that goes against their faith.

    • layo jaiyesimi

      Amen. Christians all over the world are persecuted for the sake of their religion and they forebear..taking it all with good grace. So why do christians in America think that they are exempt from carrying the cross (of persecution) that the rest of their brethren all over the world bear ? At the end ,you christians in that country need to decide whether your PRIMARY identity is “Iam a christian” or “I am an American citizen”. I tell you, if your primary identity is “American”, then you will be in court all day long fighting all who persecute you…but if your primary identity is “Christian” and you have the holy spirit dwelling within you, you will suffer persecution with the same spirit of meekness as your brothers in the faith all over the world..the spirit of CHRIST.

    • dark477

      Expecting everyone to follow the law isn’t persecution.

      • The Last Trump

        Guess that depends on the law huh? If the law of the land requires you to gas Jews and burn them in crematoriums, the Jews shouldn’t feel persecuted eh? It’s just the law. And why didn’t the gay community just follow the law when it stated FOR GENERATIONS that they could NOT marry? Guess they felt persecuted eh? So much for “expecting everyone to follow the law isn’t persecution”. Not quite that simple as laws frequently change and have a history of being immoral.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Godwin’s Law!

    • Jean Adams

      You’re correct, this bakery is being persecuted for their righteousness. People in hotels etc. are being put out of business for refusing to let unmarried people stay, which includes homosexual and lesbian as they cannot be married under God’s law.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        “this bakery is being persecuted for their righteousness.”

        No, they are not being persecuted. They are being prosecuted. And not for their “righteousness” but because they broke the law.

        “People in hotels etc. are being put out of business for refusing to let unmarried people stay”

        That is not true. There is no law that requires a hotel or other business to rent a room to two people who are not married.

        • Jean Adams

          They weren’t prosecuted, the guy who ordered the cake was a regular customer, accepted the bakery’s right to their opinion and continued to be a good customer. People came from far and wide to support the bakery and the workload was so big they couldn’t cope.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “People came from far and wide to support the bakery and the workload was so big they couldn’t cope.”

            Yeah, that must be why they shut down – too much business.

      • Churchj5

        “People in hotels etc. are being put out of business for refusing to let unmarried people stay”

        Do you have a source for this or are you pulling it out of your backside?

        • Jean Adams

          A hotel was put out of business in Cornwall for refusing a double bed room to two gay men. This hotel refused a double bed room to all unmarried people gay or hetrosexual. This was before our country’s leaders changed the law to allow gay marriage. If ALL their double rooms had twin beds they wouldn’t have the problem. They were sued for so much money they went out of business. Because you are ignorant of something, don’t assume it’s untrue and be insulting it shows lack of character.

    • Thomas Collins Jr June

      Is there here a fund to send money to help this Christian to pay any fine?

  • Starla Anne Lowry

    The judge with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries has violated the law in refusing to recognize the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution concerning freedom of religion and should be removed from office.

    • Oshtur

      Sorry religious freedom is not a carte blanche to do whatever you want. The customer’s right to religious freedom must be respected also. The business made an invitation to do business to the general public, and because of that they have to respect the customer’s right to their own religious freedom even if it is not the same as anyone’s at the business.

      • Fundisi

        The State may NOT force a Christian business owner to violate their faith by decorating a cake with a gay wedding theme. They may have to sell a cake, but not decorate it with a wicked them and make them participants in that sin.

        • Oshtur

          Not the issue here. They rejected the customer by who they were and what their beliefs about marriage were before any cake selection had occured.

          • Fundisi

            It is the issue and you know it. They made it clear it was for a Lesbian Wedding, it does not matter if it was before or after.

          • Oshtur

            What do you think is different about a lesbian wedding cake a gay wedding cake and a straight wedding quite cake? Did you ever even bother to go to the businesses website? All of the wedding cakes are totally suitable for all three types of weddings.

            I mean it’s like I’m in somewhere where they think they’re getting a sheet cake with “happy marriage carol & Fiona” written on it.

          • Fundisi

            If it is a wedding cake decorated with two male or two female names or figures or any thing that indicates a gay wedding, these Christian people were in obedience to God, not to participate by making such decorations.

          • Oshtur

            This is the 21st century, the few that use cake toppers anymore put them on themselves and no one past the age of 12 puts names on a wedding cake.

            None of the cakes on the Sweetcakes website were as you described.

          • Fundisi

            I refer to the original story and complaint. It was to contain some sort of Lesbian oriented decoration.

          • Oshtur

            sounds like more than one person has been caught in a lie then and the record is now purged of it. The openers would be still saying it if it were true, they aren’t.

            Repeating their lies is a sin in and of itself, right?

          • Fundisi

            I do not go by your liberal twisted version of the story, as you guys lie all the time. But, if I am proven wrong, I will admit my error, but the fact remains the owner did not have to make a cake for a Lesbian wedding.

    • theodore22

      uhh yeah doesn’t work that way. That’s like saying “Well the people behind the 9-11 atack were just acting under the 1st ammendment. So we’ll let it slide.”

  • theodore22

    Ohhh I’m not going to sell a cake because I believe homosexuality is a sin…but if you go right next door my husband will gladly sell you gun. Just the Christian way.

    • Gary

      Why is it a sin to own a gun?

      • theodore22

        It’s not a sin. Same reason selling a cake isn’t. But there’s only one reason to own a gun (besides hunting), to kill people. I seem to remember something in the bible that said “don’t kill” or something like that.

        • Gary

          I own several guns. And I don’t hunt. They are for self defense.

          • dark477

            Wouldn’t you only need one for that?

          • Gary

            No.

          • pax2u

            are your guns to over throw the government or shoot the neighborhood kids who walk on your lawn?

    • dark477

      You do now that threatening someone will just make it worse for you?

  • Fundisi

    By the way they did not refuse to serve gays, nor sell them a wedding cake, thy just refused to decorate it with a gay wedding theme.

    • Oshtur

      Lie. They never even got to the cake selection part of the purchase.

      • Fundisi

        That’s because they were told they wanted it decorated to celebrate a gay wedding.

        • Oshtur

          Which look exactly the same as a straight wedding cake right?

          • Fundisi

            The decoration changed it!

          • Oshtur

            What decoration? They were kicked out at the tasting before even picking a style of cake let alone any ‘decorations’.

    • Taussig

      absolute lie

      • Fundisi

        Then stop lying!

    • Badkey

      What is it about a professed christian that leads him to lie?

  • Joshua Lund

    Homosexuality is a “cancer”, and it must be treated as one. God calls us to love one another. Yes, Christians are called to love homosexuals and treat them as regular people, but that does not mean Christians should support a sinful nature. The question is, would Jesus bake a cake for a Gay couple’s wedding? I believe that he would not, because if he baked the cake, that would mean that he would be supportive of the “wedding”. If he was supportive of the “wedding”, then he would be supportive of the sin. If Christians refuse to support homosexuality even in the smallest way, I say hoorah! and God bless them! If these people do not want to make a cake for a homosexual couple, I believe they should have the liberty and freedom to do so. Alas, our nation has fallen and we have compromised in many ways. Is this “one Nation Under God”? Or, was that just a nice thing we said as we gazed upon our 5th grade classroom flag? Such potential, sadly it will end in bitterness and gnashing of teeth If a change is not made. God Loves, but he will not partner with sin.

    • Gary

      Homosexuals are perverts and should be treated as such.

      • Magister_militum_praesentalis

        How should perverts be treated?

        • Gary

          They should be shunned. I want nothing to do with them. And I try to arrange it so that I have as little to do with them as possible.

          • Choanito

            “…should be shunned,” You should be careful in your rhetoric. Jesus would never “shun” anyone.

          • Gary

            Can you name one instance from the Bible where Jesus had something to do with a homosexual? Jesus sends all homosexuals to Hell. Isn’t that a way of shunning them?

          • Choanito

            Can you name one scripture where Jesus sat with sinners? Oh, I forgot, he did that throughout his adult life.

          • Gary

            But no homosexuals, as far as we know.

          • Spoob

            Can you name one instance from the Bible where Hesus had something to do with a pastry chef? Arguments from the Bibke’s silence are not logical.

          • Choanito

            Can you name one instance where Jesus had anything to do with an Asian? Does he send all of them to hell, too? Don’t you recall that Jesus hung with tax collectors and sinners? You should be concerned for your own salvation with such a hateful condemning attitude.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Why shunned and not executed, since that is what the Bible prescribes? I don’t see anything about shunning in there, unless you live in a Quaker community.

          • Gary

            Ephesians 5:11

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            That is an interesting interpretation, but does your interpretation of that verse trump the clear reading of God’s word where it prescribes execution for homosexuals?

          • Gary

            As I have told you before, only the government has the authority from God to execute people, and then only for those things God requires capital punishment for.

      • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

        “Homosexuals are perverts and should be treated as such.”

        …so, spanking, licking, and dressing up in latex, then.

    • ELAINE MARZANO

      Good for you, you are absolutely right.

  • Faithwalker

    When a society base its foundation on the sexual desires of its people, it is doomed to fail. We have seen the consequences of wanton sexual desires have wrought over the decades, sexual diseases that have spread through out the globe that cannot be cured, destruction of families and individuals. Humanity need limitations or it will destroy itself as we are seeing day by day. Because of pride, vanity and greed, the very fabric of society is being destroyed. Even if you are an atheist, secularist, humanist agnostic and skeptic, surely you can see that our society is near the brink of disaster. Now from a Christian world view, this is why the triune God (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit) is needed in our society and lives. Through God’s word the Holy Bible there is joy, peace, abundant life, love, and compassion, forgiveness, long suffering, patience even through the trials and tribulations of life.

  • Randy Gray

    “That to secure these rights, Governments are
    instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
    governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these
    ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it” Declaration of
    Independence

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations,
    pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under
    absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such
    Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Declaration of
    Independence

  • KBH

    So many people in the comments don’t understand the difference between refusing to serve a person because of their identity and refusing to provide a specific (an unique product). this bakery has a list of products they provide. they will provide 100% of those products to any homosexual who asks. But they will not create a product, not on the menu, a cake celebrating a same-sex union. Not the same as refusing to serve a sandwich to an african-american in the 50’s. not by a long shot. if these folks owned a restaurant and said, you can’t eat what on the menu here, because of your orientation, that would be a legitimate rights violation. But this bakery was happy to serve the people, but not any product asked for. Just as the baker in the news recently who refused to make a pro-marriage cake sould have the right to refuse as well. no one should be forced to use their talents, skills, to promote something that goes against their consciences.

    • Oshtur

      Sorry it is exactly the same as the man at the deli counter saying he won’t make ‘black’ sandwiches. There is no difference – a wedding cake is the same no matter the sexes of the couple.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      If they offer wedding cakes, they are not allowed to only offer them based upon the gender of the people who are seeking the cake nor, in some places, the sexuality of the people in question.

      It would be like saying: “Yes, we make wedding cakes, but only for two people of the same race. We won’t put a bride/groom topper on the cake which indicates a mixed-race couple, because our religious belief is that the races should not mix and we won’t make the cake without decoration because we would still involved in an event that is against our religious beliefs.”

      That would be a violation of the law, just as this is.

  • Death defeater
    • Oshtur

      Haha! Yeah someone asking for stuff with derogatory messages they would put on anything they sell isn’t the same as a customer being refused from buying something the last customer could.

      • Death defeater

        Actually, there have been several people calling and asking for a simple one man and one woman pro marriage cake and the homosexuals have still refused. SO, it is highly indicative of
        hypocrites to call up a fuss and then not want to cater to
        Traditionalists.

        • Oshtur

          you have an example? Not those people that asked the business to put derogatory messages on the cakes? Those aren’t the same issue, these bakeries don’t put derogatory messages on cakes for any one.

          I don’t knoe of anyone who is agsinst traditional marriage, do you? I support it 100% and think people can marry including men and women.

          • Death defeater

            Not all the messages were derogatory. You are only thinking of the Theodore Shoebat example. There were other one’s where they simply asked to bake a cake with a man and woman that said I support traditional marriage and the bakeries refused. Why? How is that hateful….Is it not hypocritical of them to do that? I think so. I also believe in just one man and one woman marriages period. No other relationship should qualify for marriage period. Let them invent their own so called status for relationships. Furthermore, I think the state should stay out of marriage period. It should be given back to the churches to decide not the state period….

          • Oshtur

            I know of no such case. Not the guy who called with the YouTube video, not the guy suing. I support traditional marriage – I would never deny male female couples their right to marry.

            And that you would deny couples their ability to marry shows these cases aren’t even similar – my side wants everyone to have their rights, your side wants special rights.

            This is about the 100% secular civil cintract titled marriage, not the religious rite of the same name as far as the law and since same-sex religious rites will continue regardless.

          • Death defeater

            Wrong its about redefining marriage. Now we even have in Utah the ban on Polygamy marriages struck down. The so called slippery slope has happened. Further, the nuclear family benefits all of society. It is proven that it lowers crime rate, people grow up into healthy individuals. On the other hand, homosexuality is caused by abuse and neglect mostly. It is a mental issue that needs mainly strong spiritual help. Further it has not direct benefit for society….

          • Oshtur

            Wrong all the way through, families no matter the sexes of the parents show the same benefits. And Utah just got rid of its law that said having relations with someone made you married to them, a ridiculous and uniquely Utsh notion to begin with.

          • Death defeater

            Its a slippery slope and all about redefining thousand years old institution like marriage in which the traditional family is beneficial and imperative to a functional society. Further, as we continue down this slippery slope into pagan ideals we shall see the full recompense of the societal meltdown that is inevitable and will come. Just as African American communities are in full meltdown over the loss of the nuclear family. Even so will all of America with this continual slap in the face of selfish social Marxism that only seeks to advance self……

          • Oshtur

            Redefine? Sorry all things religious were ‘redefined’ as soon as the first amendment was ratified – everyone has a right to their own opinion on all things religious.

            Want a theocracy or just a country without religious freedom, there are plenty available. Or change the constitution.. Until then everyones religious rite of marriage is their right.

  • Death defeater

    Homosexuals and indeed all of the Marxist left are hypocrites to the extreme….

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      Homosexuals are part of “the Marxist Left”…? What Kool-Aid have YOU been drinking?

      And “hypocrites”…? In exactly what way, pray tell?

      • Death defeater

        Homosexuals are almost left of center on political issues. Further, the modern left is Marxist or Socialist. Our current president was a student of Saul Alinsky who was Marxist and the darling of the left Hilary Clinton wrote fan letters to Alinsky. So, to answer you query If walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it is a duck. Homosexuals are leftist and therefore Marxists. Finally, hypocrites yes they
        are. Recently, Christian bakeries have been destroyed because of refusing to bake cakes for sodomite marriages. Yet, when a man asked a homosexual bakery in N. Ireland to make a pro traditional Marriage cake, the bakery refused. Similarly a man called 15 different bakeries owned by homosexual and asked for a cake that said marriage is one man and one woman. Now how is this not hypocritical? What would making a cake like this hurt them? Its the same logic being used against the Christian owned bakeries. This by the way is just one example of the homosexual hypocrites….

  • layo jaiyesimi

    Christians in the USA should learn to take persecution on the chin same as Christians everywhere else in the world. Jesus never said “if you’re my disciples and you live in America, you’ll get an easy ride ,wink,wink”
    Taking a stand for Christ is never an easy option…but it has great reward.
    Stop moaning about going BANKRUPT for the sake of Christ when you live in the SAME world where people are KILLED for the sake of Christ.
    Jeeeez!!

  • Dr. Dee Tee

    don’t expect fair and just actions from unbelieving people who support homosexuals.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    Like all of us, the bakers were held accountable to the law.

    I’m curious if these bakers, when asked to provide a wedding cake for an opposite gender couple inquired as to whether either of the parties had ever been divorced for reasons other than infidelity, as making a cake for that couple would involve them in a relationship the Bible says is sinful. i wonder when asked to make a birthday cake for a child, if they inquired if the child was born out of wedlock, as making a cake for that child would certainly involve them in something the bible says is a sin. i wonder when asked to bake a cake for an engagement party, they inquired if the couple were having sexual relations, as doing so would involve them in a relationship the Bible says is sinful.

    I doubt, however, that the bakers made any such inquiries. Which shows that their application of their beliefs was haphazard and therefore hypocritical.

    I wonder how the bakers squared their religious beliefs with doing ANY business with homosexuals, as the Bible clearly states that Christians should not associate in this manner with sinners. Or is this another example of their hypocrisy? Why, yes, I think it is.

    • Gary

      They should have posted signs in their shop that quote what the Bible says about homosexuals, and other signs that hopefully would be viewed by homosexuals as insults. If they had done that, then maybe the kwiers would not have wanted them to bake the cake.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        They are certainly free to do what you suggested and it may well have had the desired affect.

    • http://aaglaas.blogspot.com/ aaglaas

      VERY well-said!!! Of course they don’t deny making cakes for ‘adulterers’..or any of the following: Romans 1:29-31: being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful… just as most commentators here, they’re religious moral hypocrites.

      • R.A.

        Probably because those people are straight.

        • http://aaglaas.blogspot.com/ aaglaas

          True that! 🙂

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        Hypocrisy seems to be rampant in all religions.

    • http://blogvader.tumblr.com/ Blogvader

      You’re right, and the jesus freaks seem to be forgetting that they’re the reason why these laws exist. Fifty years ago they were using Christianity as an excuse to refuse business to black people. Their mindset hasn’t changed, sadly.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        SOME of them – not all.

  • ciss

    It’s their business they should be able to refuse who they want and why they want!! That fine is really over the top !

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      If you believe that should be the case, then you should be lobbying to have all civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation repealed. Do you support doing so?

      • Gary

        I support the repeal of all laws that try to force private citizens into associations they don’t want.

        • Oshtur

          The business freely made the invitation to the public to buy their cakes, choosing to associate with them.

          • Gary

            They should have been more specific as to who they wanted for customers.

          • Oshtur

            Yes, use their freedom of association to make a private club of like minded people and make the offer of sale to just them.

          • Gary

            Or, they could post signs in their store saying they don’t want homosexuals for customers.

          • Badkey

            And lose business from straight people that don’t like bigots.

            Yeah… perfectly logical. They’ll go out of business and everybody will be better off.

          • Gary

            I would not want the business of sodomite enablers any more than I would want the business of sodomites. You included. If there are not enough people to support my business without relying on perverts and their supporters, then I would find another way to make a living.

          • Oshtur

            Nope – once the invitation has been made no religious tests can be sprung.

        • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

          Oh, but we’re not talking about private citizens…we’re talking about a BUSINESS. That’s a very important distinction.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          There is no law which “forces” citizens into associations they do not want. Operating a business is a choice.

          • Oshtur

            Even more so operating it as a public accommodation is a choice. Any business can operate as a private club and discriminate without regards to all civil rights acts; race, creed, ethnicity, whatever.

            The easy legal solution would be to split off a separate wedding services business that only offered its services to clients refered by a private club of ‘right minded’ pastors or churches. Selecting the right people first and advertising only to them is completely legal and constitutional, it’s basically what the Boy Scouts does with merit badges.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            That would most certainly be an option. Similar to churches that own buildings that they rent out to the public. If they choose to make them available to the general public, they are not allowed to discriminate in ways which violate the law. If, on the other hand, they only provide rental to members of their church, they are free to turn others away.

          • Oshtur

            I’m actually surprised some one hasn’t done it – good cottage industry that solved all their problems.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Good point. You should jump on it! You could call it: The Khristian Kake Klub.

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      No, actually, they DON’T get to refuse service to whoever they want, and ESPECIALLY not why they want. We have laws specifically PREVENTING that.

      …unless you think it’s perfectly fine to, say, refuse service to blacks, latinos, and asians. Just cuz you wanna.

      Do you think that?

    • Badkey

      Hypocrite.

      Just another religious hypocrite.

  • David Biritz

    They’re proud bigots who broke the law, but want a pass because they think they’re straight and should therefore be able to discriminate against homosexuals how they want and when they want.

    • Gary

      I am proud of my opposition to homosexuals. I have, do, and will continue to discriminate against them.

      • dark477

        And be fined and sued into bankruptcy

        • Gary

          Do it if you can.

  • Jeff T

    The amount of irony and hypocrisy in the comment section is hilarious. The general lack of intellect is just icing on the cake.

    • dark477

      Are you taking about the christians or the gay rights supporters?

      • Jeff T

        I’m talking about the people who devote their lives to a book that says not to judge others while living a life of doing the opposite.

        • Gary

          I have no need to judge homosexuals because God has already said they are wicked.

          • Jeff T

            God can’t seem to make up his mind because he supposedly loves everybody equally.

            Actually read your bible before you try to act like you know the contents.

          • Gary

            How do you know God loves everybody equally? I’m pretty sure I know more about the Bible than you do.

          • Jeff T

            Fun fact: 2/3 of the world population doesn’t believe in your deity and are doing just fine without him.

          • Gary

            It isn’t my problem that some people have wrong beliefs.

          • Jeff T

            Oh, the irony.

    • disqus_ggvdslgvY6

      “Icing on the cake”.

      I see what you did there.

  • Badkey

    I don’t understand the hypocrisy. Christians, as well as folks following other religions, get their public accommodations laws from the Civil Rights Act at the FEDERAL level… this baker, for example, would be in violation of the law to refuse to bake cupcakes for a Ramadan celebration, Passover feast, or similar.

    Some states have opted to offer the exact same public accommodations laws to gay and lesbian citizens. Why the hypocrisy? Christians aren’t “special” so what gives?

    Why not treat other citizens as you are treated under law?

    Oh, and keep in mind folks… this happened BEFORE gay marriage was legal in Oregon. Just figured you oughtta know.

    • Gary

      The laws need to be changed. People should be free to choose who they do business with. Customers have that freedom now under current law. Business owners should have the same freedoms that customers have.

      • Badkey

        Have you started a PAC or other body to remove special rights you get from the Civil Rights Act?

        • Gary

          I have not. It would be a waste of my time.

          • Badkey

            Then you obviously accept the law. And if it’s good ’nuff for christians and other religious folks, it’s good ’nuff for those christians and other religious folks don’t like.

          • Gary

            Not obvious at all. I understand that congress and Obama would never agree to change those laws. That means we have to find a way around them.

      • Badkey

        I’m curious about your thinking on this, though I generally agree with you. But I want to ask this…

        Are the roads that bring customers to their door private?
        Is the electricity grid that brings power to their business private?
        Is the water delivery that brings water to their business private (they’re in a city, not on a well)?

        Are these infrastructure components owned by the bakery? If not, where does their privacy end, public utilities they use begin?

        • Gary

          Are you saying that the businesses really belong to the government?
          Are the roads that bring customers to the business owned by the customers, or do the business owners also own them?

          • Badkey

            Not at all… but the infrastructure that supports the business is built off of the back of ALL taxpayers, not just the ones the baker likes.

            This is the root reason you see public accommodations laws.

          • Gary

            No, it isn’t the root reason for public accommodation laws. Those laws are in place because white liberals feel guilty about slavery and Jim Crow. Simple as that.

          • Badkey

            And so they gave special public accommodations protections to religious people?

            Yeah… that makes total sense.

  • Carolyn Rollins

    Praying …

    • Lowe Webber

      Me too, but I doubt that some of the ‘christian’ right wing will ever get it.
      There just seems to be a blind disconnect that they can’t see they are not an exception.

  • writeonbrother

    Two Lesbians put a hetero woman out of business. Talk about a War on Women.

  • Jen

    Baking and selling a cake is not participating in a wedding. It is completing a business transaction. I would somewhat understand if they were asking the bakers to stand up at the ceremony and give a speech, but come on. The baker believing that by selling a wedding cake they are participating in a wedding!

  • Spoob

    A correction to this article – on the first paragraph it says it was a “wedding” cake. This is incorrect. It is a wedding cake.

  • Dana Thomas Buckner

    The Kleins will be blessed by holding firm to the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ. I will keep them in prayer…defend your rights as a Christian.

  • Dana Thomas Buckner

    An easy solution, and “Christlike” gesture would have been to just make the cake without the bride & bride statuettes, What the customers do with it after that is their prerogative.

    • Badkey

      There was no request made for bride & bride statuettes… or any other decoration.

      Otherwise, I totally agree.

  • finishstrongdoc

    Typical liberal judge. Free speech rights for liberals but not conservatives. You can’t force someone to testify against themselves, and under a broad understanding of free speech rights, this is what these cases come down to. The First Amendment is about Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion and Freedom of the Press. They go together for a reason. You can’t have one without the others. Would you force Planned Parenthood abortion mills to have graphic images of aborted fetuses published in their brochures? Nope; that’s against their cherished belief that the unborn aren’t persons and can be killed for any reason or no reason. Why would you then want a Christian bakery to produce a wedding cake with two mommies or two daddies on it?

    • Oshtur

      Fyi: this is the 21st century, few people put statuettes on their cakes and those that do usually buy them and place them themselves. And none, zero, of these cases have even gotten to the cake style selection.

      • finishstrongdoc

        Should pharmacies that refuse to sell cigarettes, citing the health hazards of smoking, be sued by smokers?

        I had another post censored by the admins in which I mentioned adult diapers.

        • Badkey

          Smokers are not covered by public accommodations laws.

          Try again.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Gay so-called marriage is a public health hazard, thus the reference to the adult diapers. That alone should be reason enough for bakeries to turn down those who want gay wedding cakes to be made … or “Poo on you, I’ll sue!”

          • Badkey

            You’re not very bright.

          • finishstrongdoc

            I know; that’s why I don’t lean on my own understanding, but allow Jesus to take the wheel.
            5Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. 6In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight.…
            ~Proverbs 3:5-6~

        • Oshtur

          I don’t understand how people can misunderstand this issue. This is about a business refusing to sell to one customer what they would sell to another. It is NOT about them refusing to sell something to any customer.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Some people’s souls aren’t for sale. I don’t see why this is so difficult for people to understand.

          • Oshtur

            Vacuous reply. The business is the one offer the sale of wedding cakes to all takers. If that was putting their soul ‘for sale’ then the sin is their own.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Judgmental, much? Let the courts decide. And when the verdict comes down on the just for doing rightly, the sentence will eventually be laid on your ledger. There will be a Final Judgment.

          • Oshtur

            And the court has, they are on to the penalty phase. The 52 page decision is clear and goes through point by point why the business willfully broke the law.

            Again the lesson is:

            Don’t make a public offering that isn’t available to people of all beliefs, the customer’s right to religious freedom shields them from after-the-offer religious discrimination.

          • finishstrongdoc
          • Oshtur

            Yeah it must just be systemic weak mindedness. This man was asking for something the business didn’t sell – items with derogatory messages on them. He was not asking for an item the business did sell as the customer’s in this case were.

            Refusing to sell something the business won’t sell to any customer ISN’T discrimination.

            Refusing to sell something to a customer the business has sold to others IS discrimination.

          • finishstrongdoc

            “Everything’s for sale, but the price isn’t always money.”
            ~Iron Mike Tyson, Philosopher~

          • Oshtur

            Now a fortune cookie response. Why reply when you have nothing to say?

          • finishstrongdoc

            If you didn’t like that response, you won’t like this one:

            “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

            The problems caused by gay so-called marriage are nothing to be wished upon others; why would a Christian baker not be encouraged to refuse to enable these moral and physical problems? Because people who generally don’t want Christians to speak up and act on their beliefs also don’t wish to look at all the facts.

            What’s good for all is what’s in play here. When the law is perverted to protect that which it shouldn’t be protecting and punish those whom they shouldn’t be punishing, the law has become lawless, and the country that follows lawless laws will soon perish.

            “The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!

            If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow-citizens to it.”

            ~Frederic Bastiat, “The Law” 1854~
            http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

          • Oshtur

            Thank you for making it clear that you regret living in the United States of America. I would suggest moving because every citizen has a constitutional right to not share your views on sin and every American acknowledges that right.

            Again if the business felt it couldn’t sell something to people of all beliefs it wouldn’t have offered it to the public in the first place.

            The sin is the business owner’s.

          • finishstrongdoc

            As I have said, if the righteous are punished, and you advocate for their punishment, their judgment which you wished upon them will be heard in the Court of Heave at your Particular Judgment. If you are speaking for the Righteous Judge in this, and your wanting Christians to be punished for their sins is the righteous judgment in this matter, then you have no reason to worry.

            Throughout history, earthly courts have as often been wrong as right, and the First Amendment is meant to be enforced through the reasoning that allowing persons’ the freedom to do good and avoid evil is the best we as human beings can do, under the circumstance of human beings having a fallen human nature, which tends towards attractions to sins of the flesh.

            Sins of the flesh begin in the heart. I would suggest you have a heart-to-heart talk with your Maker on this matter, and repent, do atonement for your misjugment, and sin no more.

          • Oshtur

            No I’m a Christian and pray that God forgive all their trespasses just as I work to forgive those who trespass against me.

            No Christian wants any sinner to be punished, as we are all sinners and wishing that on someone else is asking God to treat me the same way.

            These bakers deliberate and with purpose chose to disregard the law when they could have obeyed it simply by not offering the public something that all could not buy.

            And I appreciate your concern, I am right with my Maker and would suggest that the person who needs to maybe check in is much closer to you.

          • finishstrongdoc

            So, as a Christian, I’m hearing you say, speaking for Creator God, that it’s a sin to refuse to enable sin, but it’s not a sin to sin.

            You may want to reread the incident in the Bible where the men of Sodom wanted the angels to come out of Abraham’s house so they could rape them. And then, as we all know, God sent judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah in the form of fire and brimstone. If homosexuality is not a sin, then God needs to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah. And you.

          • Oshtur

            Your ears are full of wax if that’s what you heard. What I said is it is God’s decision on the consequences of sin, not mine. We are all saved by His undeserved gift of Grace alone and only He knows its depths and limits. I pray God shows all the mercy that I pray he will show me as all Christians do.

            And since Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for their treatment of the poor, the weak, and the vulnerable most of all, your statement makes no sense. The rabbi’s talked of the sins of Sodom for centuries, and never mentioned same-sex behavior. Adultery yes. Torture of the poor and travelers, yes. And the last straw that caused the cities to cry was when a maiden tried to secretly give a poor beggar food and was caught. She was stripped, covered in honey and tied to the city walls where the insects and bees consumed her. That was the sin that sparked the cities’ demise.

            God said this too when He told his disciples that towns that didn’t make them welcome would be treated the same.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Wow! All that didn’t make the cut, never made it into Sacred Scripture, yet somehow that’s why we call sins against the poor and travelers “sodomy” today. Got it. How could we have missed that for so long? Thanks.

            Now, go get your apology from God. Or should He come to you? I’m not sure how that works. Maybe He’ll send a thunderbolt. Or fire and brimstone.

          • Oshtur

            Playing the fool doesn’t help your case. There is no coitus in Genesis 19, other than Lot offering his daughters to the crowd to try and placate the mob outside. And that the early church was corrupted isn’t a shock, what else could the Devil do with His power broken other than to mislead?

            Again, those closest to the issue talked for centuries and it wasn’t about same-sex behavior, the idea that suddenly it was an ‘oh by the way’ moment doesn’t cut it. Again, no same-sex behavior happens in the Torah, it wasn’t thought to be the issue for centuries in discussions by God’s Chosen people, Jesus used it in connection with how the travelers where treated, Ezekiel did also, where would anyone get the idea it was about same-sex behavior at all?

            And why would I even want an apology from God? But your mocking Him can’t be something that good for you.

          • finishstrongdoc

            If “the early church was corrupted,” then, of course, let’s just all make guesses as to what was and wasn’t said, what the early church did and didn’t do, and make things up to suit the modern interpretation of what is believed to have been said and done back in the beginning of Christianity.

            The only problem with that is what’s new today will be old tomorrow.

          • Oshtur

            Again show me the gay in Genesis 19. Until then it’s not there.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Moderators won’t let me reply to you. Must be the gay lobby censoring the Truth.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Lots of things we can’t see are still there. One of the reasons for the inability to see the unseen is moral blindness.

          • finishstrongdoc

            4Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.5Answer a fool as his folly deserves, That he not be wise in his own eyes.6He cuts off his own feet and drinks violence Who sends a message by the hand of a fool.…
            ~Proverbs 26:4-6~

          • Oshtur

            Ok I will stop responding to you, your foolishness has been obvious for awhile.

          • finishstrongdoc

            Go eat your fortune cookie; you earned it.

  • http://www.blastthetrumpet.org Michael Swenson

    https://www.facebook.com/notes/michael-swenson/americans-and-citizens-of-the-world-freedom-and-life-comes-from-god/748905988521696 when will the world and especially Christians realize there is no harmony between righteousness and wickedness. It is the duty of those who know GOD to ARREST all criminals (not leave them loose to sue, harass or harm innocent people in any way). https://www.facebook.com/notes/michael-swenson/the-planned-demoralization-of-america/632305113515118 any nation that allows sodomites to run free is risking the Divine Consequences still available for all the world to see. http://pinkoski.com/sodom-a-gomorrah.html

    • dark477

      You can’t arrested them. homosexuality isn’t a crime in most first world nations and if you try you’ll be the punished.

    • Badkey

      Alluah Akbar!!

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Where is religious liberty? The West should never have put colored races and immoral lifestyles together. It was colonization by force before. Now it’s the West’s colonization by abnormal sexual immorality. The latter is utterly evil, tyrannical, and far more destructive to everyone on Planet Earth.

    • Oshtur

      Protecting the customer’s religious liberty is what the court did. The business chose to advertise to people of all faiths. There is no right to religious discrimination in a public offering in the United States.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        It’s a crime to make people participare in murder(abortion) and sexual immorality against one’s own conscience. Face the fact; the United States of America is losing liberty and the sane conscience itself.

        • Oshtur

          No one made this business offer to sell wedding cakes to the public and no one has asked them to have sexual relations in an immoral fashion.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Having to have to bake cakes for gay marriage is EXACTLY the same thing as being forced to participate in immorality. Secular Americans bow down to anything and have no idea what it is like to be loyal to the truth. You guys are worse than the Japanese military government of WW2 era which made everyone bow down before the filthy shrine of their king in trying to break people’s conscience. Shame on you.

          • Oshtur

            So paying wages to an employee that uses them to sin is also EXACTLY a sin? If not, why not?

            So you aren’t an American? Then your opinion is of no value to me. This business could have run as a private club and religiously discriminated till the cows came home, they were just too lazy, stupid or enslave to Mammon to do so.

            No one forced them to disrespect the public’s right to not share their religious beliefs, no one made them offer wedding cakes to people they had no intention of selling them to.

            The sin is the baker’s alone – they had multiple ways they could have only served those they wanted but didn’t bother. This country has a right to religious freedom, including the customers and every business owner has known that for many decades.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Honest labor deserves wages. Religious institutions have rights to hire only those with the same faith. America influences all nations and truth must be notified to it by every national, since today’s America is anything but what it meant to be. Everyone has rights to live according to God’s truth and conscience in privacy and public; gays could come and buy stationaries or bread but should NEVER ask Christians to celebrate their immorality by demanding to print invitation cards or bake wedding cakes. Gay “marriage” is not marriage but a blasphemy. You are not correct on your homeland; today’s American liberty is limited to the atheists and immoral people. This news is the proof.

          • Oshtur

            Inconsistent since the stationary and bread could be just as much a part of the wedding and reception and, of course, buying a cake no more makes them participants than buying bread or stationary.

            Again, there is no right to religious discrimination in America, if this is a hard concept for you to understand then work on it otherwise your comments are pretty pointless.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            It’s different. Having gay customers come and buy bread = acknowledgment of gay’s rights to eat bread. Baking wedding cakes for gay “marriage” = acknowledgment of gay “marriage,” which is the violation against conscience. America forces people to acknowledge sexual immorality as a normal human activity. America’s such custom is wrong.

          • Oshtur

            No, their obligation is to acknowledge the customer’s right to not share their religion. You might think same-sex marriages are immoral but many people, many Christians, do not.

            Again, no one forced them to sell wedding cakes. They could just sell cakes and have avoided all of this.

            It is unconstitutional here to not respect the rights of other citizens to not share our own religious beliefs. A moral business would have never offered the public something they wouldn’t sell to people of all faiths in the first place.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Homosexuality is condemned in the Holy Bible. All true Christians do not acknowledge gay “marriage.” Because you oppress Christians in your land and threaten them, some of them were made silent and submissive to immorality. Any bakers have rights to bake and sell wedding cakes while rejecting gay “marriage,” as any wedding halls have rights to reject to hold gay wedding ceremony. Otherwise, all wedding business has to be forced to acknowledge immorality. Gays should ask the business instead of demanding; otherwise, the civilization will be unfairly subdued only by immorality. Constitution does NOT support immorality. Public does NOT exist for immoral people alone, and no one must demand anyone to participate or acknowledge immorality. Let immoral people stay within their border instead of spreading and demanding others their own immorality.

          • Oshtur

            So many fiats. Heterosexuality is condemned in the Bible too, your point? And true Christians do acknowledge gay marriage just as they do straight marriage for Christians there is no ‘male or female’, couples of all sexes marry in the eyes of God just fine.

            And no the bakers do not have a right to religiously discriminate against others in the US – keep your Korean theocracy out of US business. We have religious freedom here.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, you should stop trying to control the religious people by imposing immorality upon everyone. USA doesn’t have religious liberty and it affects the entire world badly.

          • Oshtur

            That you don’t understand what universal religious liberty is is obvious, further discussion is pointless without that understanding.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Secular America is morally and ethically wrong in forcing sexual immoral culture on the Earthlings. America needs major correction. The above ruling must be overturned for the sake of justice and freedom and equality.

          • Oshtur

            Bring it on, maybe you can do it through the Hello Kitty brigade.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            America’s problem is its hatred against Christianity. Seeing today’s America is like seeing evil kids trying to murder their good and decent parents. Why have you guys gone so wrong? Couldn’t you be more moderate bad and leave Christians alone? America’s boasting of immorality brought tyranny in the Land of the Free; it was just a matter of time. Poor American Founding Fathers to have this kind of oppressive descendants. Pagans even don’t do this to bakers.

          • Oshtur

            You are mistaking some Christians trying to get special rights with some sort of persecution of Christians. There are over 217 official denominations and over 35,000 non-denominational churches in the United States.

            Look at this case – it is the business owned by Christians that wants a special right to religiously discriminate in the making of a public offer, which is proscribed by the constitution and most state constitutions.

            Christians are doing just fine here, my denomination just doesn’t ask for special rights that aren’t possible under our system of government.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Oshtur, you are NOT Christian; stop pretence. Because you are not victims, you don’t know what it is like to be victimized. This news is the proof the United States of America is upholding religious persecutions instead of liberty.

          • Oshtur

            And by denying my relationship with the Spirit and saying that what comes from God does not you have condemned yourself to hell. I will pray He shows mercy upon you.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are NOT Christian because supporting homosexuality means denial of sin’t existence and the basic Biblical Christian doctrines. Anyone can claim to be anything. The Holy Bible calls sexually immoral people to repentance; you are doing the opposite and you don’t belong to God. You and your denomination are apostate. You need to repent to be saved.

          • Oshtur

            Get thee behind me Satan. Your understanding of Christianity is as warped as your understanding of America. I have no more pearls for you. May God have mercy on your soul.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Oshtur: Stop claiming to be Christian because it’s a lie. God condemns homosexuals to hell and you are doing the works of Satan by hindering the homosexuals from the life-saving repentance. You and your denomination are the last thing gays need for salvation. Read the Holy Bible and stop supporting sexual perversions. You are hurting children, among all. May God rescue people from deadly apostates like you and your evil denomination.

          • Oshtur

            I rebuke you, you are devoid of the Spirit and its fruits, ignore the Word of God and block others from His Grace. better you were to put a millstone around your neck than turn a single person more from God.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            What you quoted was for yourself who are destructive to children.

          • Oshtur

            May God have mercy on your dark twisted soul.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Do not blaspheme. God does not hear the prayers of perversion supporters. Repent of your evil doing first.

          • Spoob

            I do not think it is your place to tell others if they are Christian or not.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            God’s Word, the Holy Bible, defines what Christian is. Those who support sexual perversions are NOT Christian because they do the opposite of what the holy and loving God wills and commands. God commands gays to repent, not continue in evil. ( I, II, III John, Jude, Revelation)

          • BarkingDawg

            “Having to have to bake cakes for gay marriage is EXACTLY the same thing as being forced to participate in immorality. “

            No it is not. stop being so over dramatic.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Yes, it is the same thing. Christians are not to celebrate evil. People with no principles to live by do not understand it. America should stop persecuting Christians.

  • Gary

    Notice: We do not want the business of homosexuals or their supporters. Put a sign that says that on the wall. If questioned by the government, say you are not refusing to do business with homosexuals, but you don’t want to. That is not illegal. The sign will serve to let everyone know your position, and hopefully will get homosexuals and their supporters to take their business elsewhere.

    • Spoob

      You’d get tossed in jail if you put up a sign like that.

  • Dr. Dee Tee

    the judge was an dis wrong. he supports sin and gives them money when all he had to do is tell the lesbians to go to another bakery

    • BarkingDawg

      That was not the issue before the judge. the issue was: “did the bakery discriminate?”

      The judge ruled that they did.

      • Dr. Dee Tee

        that is the issue and he was wrong in his decision. the bakers did not discriminate

        • BarkingDawg

          according to Washington State law, they did.

          • Dr. Dee Tee

            no, according to the opinion of the judge

            according to God’s law, homosexuals are to be put to death, should we return to that legal statute and rid us of this homosexual problem once and for all?

          • Oshtur

            (Oregon not Washington law) and not opinion, according to the constitution of the United States, Oregon and the legal statutes. With a universal right to religious freedom there is no way to allow religious discrimination in a public offering.

            Either the public offering is available to people of all beliefs, or
            It shouldn’t be being offered to the public.

            There is no constitutional way to rescind a public offer because of the beliefs of the customer, their right to religious freedom shields them from such acts of licentiousness.

  • William Tyndale

    And the decline and fall of this once moral virtuous nation continues unabated without interruption.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Where is the hard-earned religious liberty in the Western Civilization?
    The West should never have put together the colored people and the
    people with immoral lifestyles in the same category; that was the
    ethically wrong thing since the start. There was a colonization by force
    before. Now it’s the secular West’s colonization by abnormal sexual
    immorality. No Caesar today, but the secular West is trying to make
    people submit to a perversion. Such colonization is utterly evil,
    tyrannical, and far more destructive to everyone on Planet Earth. Life
    of the homosexuals must be protected( since Jesus gave sexual offenders
    unspecified time for repentance), but they should never exercise tyranny
    against Christians like this, as if everyone has to adhere to
    immorality. Being immoral or supporting immorality is such a strict duty
    in a secular world. Where can religious people breathe? America must
    stop doing this adsurd evil and uphold religious liberty.

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    The First Amendment and the remainder of the biblically incompatible Constitution is the problem not the solution.

    Had the late 18th-century founders established government and society on Yahweh’s immutable moral law (including the First Commandment, Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13) instead of capricious Enlightenment and Masonic concepts, there would be no homosexual agenda in America today because no sodomite or homosexual would dare expose themselves to petition the government for their “rights.”

    “…3. Every problem America faces today can be traced back to the fact that the
    framers failed to expressly establish a government upon Yahweh’s immutable morality as codified in His commandments, statutes, and judgments. (Would infanticide and sodomy be tolerated, let alone financed by the government, if Yahweh’s perfect law and altogether righteous judgments were the law of the land? Would Islam be a looming threat to our peace and security if the First Amendment had been replaced with the First Commandment? Would Americans be in nearly as much debt if usury had been outlawed as a form of theft? Would crime be as rampant if “cruel and unusual punishment” had not been outlawed and criminals were instead punished with Yahweh’s altogether righteous judgments? Would we be on the fiscal cliff if we were taxed with a flat increase tax rather than a graduated income tax?)….”

    For more, see blog article “5 Reasons the Constitution is Our Cutting-Edge Issue” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/index.html.

    Then find out how much you REALLY know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that EXAMINES the Constitution by the Bible.

    • BarkingDawg

      So you want to scrap the US Constitution in favor of a theocracy?

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        “…There is no escaping theocracy. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.

        “People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?…”

        For more, see online Chapter 3 “The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH” at bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html.

  • Wraith

    If Christian network is pro-gay, then you openly go against scripture teachings, & if you believe in a Higher Power, then you will have to give account for your actions, & for being pro gay. So I truly hope that is not the case because homosexuality not only destroys the individual, but also destroys the family nucleus.

    • Oshtur

      Many of your messages are not posting.

      • Wraith

        I know, I wonder why… Then maybe Christian network has something to hide… If they are so Christian, then why not go to the source directly to see what the source of their faith has to say about it…

        • ELAINE MARZANO

          I don’t think that is the problem. but I got to say this boy you are a little scary. but that is all right it is better than looking at something that isn’t their.

          • Wraith

            I use a mask to conceal identity, in the past people have tried to do harm. So no names, no personal data, no past, no present, no face, just the truth, & nothing else, even if that truth hurts or offends others.

          • Wraith

            These people, the ones the support what is morally wrong, remind me of the times of Daniel, of the times of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, people that stood up against a corrupt form of government. & there will be a time in which this own very government will turn against its own people to persecute those that don’t adopt liberal ideals, obviously, that go against even scripture.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            There is got to be something we can do besides take there crap!!

          • Wraith

            Yes there is, Christians must start doing their job. Christians must wake up from their slumber. Not side with the enemy. If Christians were doing their job this nations would not be in state it is right now. We would not have progressive liberals in the three branches of power. The liberal progressives have already infiltrated the highest positions of power, & they are the ones destroying this nation.

            You have to remember this, which is a true statement…

            “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” – Abraham Lincoln

          • Wraith

            Mmm… disqus is NOT a reliable form of communication to send a clear moral message about these topics. Clearly, disqus sides with the LGBTQ movement & negates the consequences of that lifestyle.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            Maybe we are not being clear about how we feel about freedom of speech. That is covered isn’t it? How do they think they can just take it away and why are we letting them?

          • Wraith

            Simple, they have an agenda, & they represent interest groups of powerful individuals that have great influence over them. There are sociopolitical forces that operate behind the curtains, that people are not even aware of.

          • Wraith

            So many of my messages have been deleted, as well as the treats the LGBTQ movement send me on a daily basis.

          • Oshtur

            No it is because CNN has an odd review list of words. Example the other word like gender automatically puts the message in review mode, and you seem to have found at least one more that does that. Other Disqus forums are not so restrictive.

          • Wraith

            It depends, I was literately banned from breitbart, which supposedly is a conservative form of media, but apparently they are not. All I know is that pertaining this topic, freedom of speech has been restricted. CNN is a progressive liberal form of media, so yes, that explains what is happening.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            What happened to freedom of speech. Oh yeah I forgot the president of our once beautiful America decided we don’t deserve it. We don’t deserve him either but he is still here!!!

          • Wraith

            I know that barak hussein obama is the biggest mistake this country has ever produced. I know that he is a legal elected official that at the same time is an enemy of the State, that wants to weaken the might & power of the United States. I know that under his watch, radicalism has become stronger. I know that he is not doing anything to protect American lives abroad; clear example of this is Benghazi, the ISIS beheading when he was playing golf like nothing was happening, & most recently, the death of a young American woman in the hands of radicals.

            This nation does deserve its president, this is a democratic Republic after all, & people did elect this flawed, corrupt man into power. So I disagree, this nation does deserve what we have right now. People didn’t pay attention to the character this man had, if any character at all he had. If he is still here it is because people allowed him to stay here. Now we truly know who that man is because he literately has shown his true self to the rest of the world.

            & yes, he is also a liar, he used to support traditional marriage, & know he has flipped flopped his position. He has lied congressional style. & yes, he is also attempting to modify government, so that government has more power over people. He is attempting to take free speech away from people.

            Only problem that these people don’t get at all is that if America falls, they fall with the rest of America, & not even their children will have an America to live in.

          • ELAINE MARZANO

            I will never understand how they did not know about him. I knew before he was elected. And during his first two years he was too quiet. He was so busy putting his plan to destroy us in effect. Then came year three and he started dropping little bombs, a new tax here and another one did anyone notice, no. Then he dropped the big one Obamacare. nice try and it worked for a while. until he lost it. Then came all the lies and another election. and I do not care what they say If they hadn’t cheated he would not have been elected. So here we are living in the middle of a nightmare. We need to get out of it.

          • Wraith

            Because there are forces operating behind the curtains. I came to realize that this is not a democracy, I came to realize that this nation is a corporation oligarchy. The people that truly have power are those that have the means to buy governments. & this government is a bought government, but people do live in the false idea that this is still a democratic republic. The reality is quite different.

            The LGBTQ movement is a lie, they promote this as equal rights, but in reality is population control by free will. They want the destruction of the family nucleus.

      • Wraith

        Genesis does state that God created man & woman, not man & man… which obviously… that would mean the extinction of the human species before it began.

  • Opus35

    What about the gay man who wants to help the bakers in Oregon? He is trying to raise $150,000, here is a small sample of the article that was written by the Christian Post.
    Matt Stolhandske, a board member of Evangelicals for Marriage Equality who describes himself as a gay evangelical Christian, is now seeking to raise funds to help Oregon-based Christian bakers Aaron and Melissa Klein pay off approximately $150,000 in fines levied against them by the state because they refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding. He pointed to his campaign on rally.org which has raised a paltry $3,000 of the 150,000 he is hoping to raise for the bakers.
    That’s a good man, that’s a Christian, that’s a gay man..

    • Oshtur

      Well most realize that giving money before any fine is levied is a bit foolhardy – what the state is asking and what will be awarded are two very different things. No case like this has every had that high of an award particularly for a single incidence.

      And Matt has given no guarantees on what will happen to the money if it isn’t needed at all.

      Wait and donate after the judgement is made would be the prudent decision.

      • Opus35

        If you have any doubts, of Matts sincerity, you can easily go to rally.org. You can also post to a wall there and communicate with him.
        It’s funny, I have not heard in any of the articles about this story of any other effort to raise some of the money for this couple. I also don’t know of any heterosexual trying to help raise money for them, the Christian Post made no mention of anyone else but Matt trying to raise money. Interesting don’t you think?

        • Oshtur

          I have read it, I have doubts.

          • Opus35

            And what about the fact that it is a Christian gay man who is trying to help this couple. Where’s the Christian heterosexuals trying to raise money for them? When the fine is made known to general public, will you be donating then? Or is this just another way to keep gays and lesbians as the villains?

          • Oshtur

            Oh I see your point now.

  • BarkingDawg

    Next time, know the laws of the state in which you operate a business.

  • ELAINE MARZANO

    I guess what a lot of you are saying is we have no right to judge weather or not it is all right to be Gay and want to control the world. I can not figure out why the decision should be ours. I thought that was Gods rule. And why are we allowed to change his rules without question? And I hope that the money the gentleman is collecting for the bakery to pay there fines is coming is coming from the gay community only. Then it would make sense. I the meantime the potus is sitting back enjoying every minute of our problem. Why isn’t he donating? As far as the donors status. He claims to be a Christian. how did he work that out? just thinking out loud.

  • Wraith

    Government Intermeddling in Religion

    “I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

    “In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies.” –Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378

    “Our Constitution… has not left the religion of its citizens under the power of its public functionaries, were it possible that any of these should consider a conquest over the consciences of men either attainable or applicable to any desirable purpose.” –Thomas Jefferson: Reply to New London Methodists, 1809. ME 16:332

    “I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them, an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises and the objects proper for them according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands where the Constitution has deposited it… Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429

    “To suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own.” –Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2: 546

    “It is… proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe, a day of fasting and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant, too, that this recommendation is to carry some authority and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription, perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed?… Civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428

  • AK

    This is getting ridiculous. Businesses should have a choice to serve who they want to serve. This is not discrimination. This is intruding into their faith and belief system.

  • Bruce Morrow

    Government tyranny folks! The government forcing businesses to participate in activities they find morally wrong. The perfect example is the case of these Christian bakers.

  • John Mark IB

    it’s actually reverse discrimination isn’t it? and this is purely signs of the times here folks, business can’t refuse who they serve? but what about the ones who put up signs saying no shoes no shirt no service? and what if the business is a Christian owned business? they don’t have rights but are at the mercy of the state? yes siree bob, indeed it’s tyranny, and a violation of the freedom of religion? isn’t it? or not? why couldn’t they choose a different baker? aren’t baker’s a dime a dozen so to speak? or why not go to a pro homosexual baker? but no we’ll go to the state and report it maybe sue them win some money get them put in jail etc., and we thought Canada was bad with it’s hate crimes laws?? really?? I bet you if it was a muslim business they’d not be a word said against it??!!! what you talkin bout willis??? can any one say end times madness!! say good night gracie!! good night gracie!!! so sad let’s be in prayer for these folks seriously this is ridiculous but Jesus predicted it and even told us as much we just happen to be living in the history goes backwards and repeats itself era of back to rome!! here’s hope give them hope pass it on!! may GOD bless you all with love joy and peace always in Jesus name amen!! and LORD please help these folks to stand for you and be with them in Jesus name amen!! someone should start up a fund to help these folks just like they did for others on the net etc.,let’s see if GOD doesn’t pour out a blessing upon them for their stand for His Word and righteousness!!
    http://faithsaves.net/truth-for-gay-friends/
    http://faithsaves.net

    http://www.pillarandground.org/home?/page_id=36

    http://discoverthebible.org

    http://faithsaves.net/the-book-of-daniel-prophetic-proof-the-bible-is-the-word-of-god/

  • Lynda Falls

    So if Muslims or Jews refuse to make a cake that says Jesus is Lord is that discrimination against Christians?

    • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

      It’s about whether the customer is being refused BECAUSE they are a Christian or BECAUSE they are black or gay or whatever.

      In other words, if I refused to make a product because I disagreed with the message I was being asked to put ON the cake, then I should be okay. In the case above, they didn’t get that far – they were refused (as the baker admits) before anything in the way of customization was discussed.

      So it becomes a quesiotn of whether they were denied the same product as the next guy because they were gay.

      These are kind of stupid laws, but that’s how they work.

      • Lynda Falls

        Well the florist and baker did not refuse because they were gay, as they served them with kindness for years. It was the participating in behaviour that they could not do because it violated their conscience. They could not participate in the ceremony.

        • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

          Yeah, I think these are borderline cases, which is why they are generating so much discussion and heat on the net.

  • Lynda Falls

    Or they try to liken not being forced to take part in behaviour that violates another’s free conscience to human sacrifice wow, that is getting desperate.

    “or abridging the freedom of
    speech,”
    Remember these people served the customers for years with kindness, they just could not take part in ceremonies that violated their conscience and would harm them mentally or spiritually.
    Now they want to compare such a simple basic right to horrible things in order to try to justify their need to control other peoples thoughts and consciences.
    They need to use some straight forward reason and intelligence.

  • Lynda Falls

    “Or abridging the freedom of speech” does not anywhere exclude business owners. Business owners are included in the people.
    Plus remember freedom of association.