Christian Bakers Who Lost their Business after Homosexual Attack Refuse to Pay $135K

I can't wait until a Christian goes into a homosexual bakery and demands a cake that says something offensive about homosexuals.

 

The facts don't agree with their bias, facts lose. The actual facts of legal hearings like this seldom match up with the public perception about them.

If someone reads the case and still thinks its a massive gay conspiracy they obviously aren't going to be convinced by anyone or anything they are wrong. Maybe we have a bunch of cash contributors on here. Its a lot harder to realize your wrong once you've put money into it. You'd have to admit to making a huge mistake.

I'm done. Let em wallow in it.

 

If that happens and they refuse, I would expect the same type of fine to be levied as well.

 

That's their choice.

Still, they never discriminated against gays, as this lesbian in the middle of this had previously bought a wedding cake for her mother. Melissa knew the woman was gay and even told her to come back for more.

They only refused a cake for a specific event.

But this reality has been discussed and ignored by the left, to death.

Still, this gay couple will be lifelong "victims"....

From the liberal Slate.com

The couple met in Texas and lived there for seven years. During that time, they faced terrible anti-gay discrimination. Passers-by would throw bottles at them and call them dykes. When Rachel got sick with typhus, the hospital refused to let Laurel see her. Rachel’s doctor suggested she should leave Laurel because engaging in “the gay lifestyle” might prevent her from healing. Soon after that, they moved to Oregon to escape homophobia.

zzz...

 

^ More piles of dung.

They never even discussed the actual cake. Two minutes into the cake tasting appointment they were told s'long by the abominable Arron - after hearing the names of the couple.

You keep showing how little actual facts you know about this case. Bone up. It might help.

 

I don't think so, the fine was baed in part the bakery's refusal to bake a cake, but in trial, under oath, the couple stated they would discriminate in the future as well. The fine is not only based on the singular event, but the possibility of future events that was stated, under oath, without force, by the same couple. In legal terms, they screwed up big time..

 

Have you met any Gays or Lesbians couples? I know many one is a Catholic, the other goes to a non domanation church. So who hates God now?

 

They refused based on the premise of that specific event. If I went to them and ask them to bake the cake with Kim and Kelly, Congrats to the New Couple. they would discriminate based on the belief that it was a gay couple. Never mind that the names Kelly and Kim can apply to either a boy or a girl. Thus, they refused to bake the cake based on sexual orientation, not the event itself.

 

I wouldn't. Homosexuals are a protected class and Christians are the target these days. Our government is too corrupt.

 

THIRD time now you post that same **** - even after being told it is FALSE, and even having been shown a page and link to the Findings by BOLI.

Now you've even doubled down on it: Show us where "Melissa knew the woman was gay and even told her to come back for more.'

Go on. Let's see if you can prove it.

Typically though, I'll bet you ignore this post.

Let's see if you can man up this time and stand behind your words.

 

Why in the hell would anyone purchase a cake off the shelf for a wedding? Rednecks don't even do that.

 

Nope. The couple wanted a custom cake that offended the owner's beliefs. Cakes were on the shelf and the owners were ready to sell one. Nope, the homosexuals had a pre planned agenda.

 

This is interesting.
http://shoebat.com/2014/12/12/chris...age-cake-denied-service-watch-shocking-video/

 

^ Turning conservatives into liberals one post at a time.

 

i don't disagree on that. Gag orders are BS

 

Your posts are hysterical.

 

Government Tyranny.

 

They did not have a "gag order."


They were required to follow ORS 659A.409. That says a place of public accommodation in OR cannot publish or circulate an intent to violate the law.

They were doing that. It had nothing to do with talking about the case itself.

It wasn't a gag order. It was a "follow the law" order.

 

Hold it guys, check this out:

At the time of the refusal, same-sex marriage had not yet been legalized in Oregon.

And here is the list of ailments you suffer when you don't get a cake:

http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/02/s...make-cake-for-lesbian-couple-fines-them-135k/

 

You said a shop owner should be able to turn away ANYONE for ANY reason, it has not been that way for decades. Public accommodation laws have been around for a long time. Oh let me guess you are just pissed cause you can't discriminate against gays any longer. Oh well so sad for you. Much like companies cannot discriminate based on race either. Guess if you are sad you can always have a shoulder to cry on for those that want to discriminate based on race as well and ask for a tissue.

 

So someone wanting a custom cake now has an agenda? Wow it's amusing to what people will spin these days into some agenda. Custom cake= agenda now We had two cakes a Custom one for the adults and a normal one for the kids at the wedding of my best friend who married her long time girlfriend. We didn't have to go to different store to get their cake. Which is odd to say the least as we live in Texas.

 

I'd hate to see Christians play the same spiteful game.

Then again I'm a Christian who feels they should just make the cake.

I don't think God is going to punish them for it, but I realize their concern is the art/time they invest in something they don't believe in.

That's the real issue.

Which is why the left ignores it and instead asks "where does the Bible mention cake?"

 

Which makes the case that they refused to bake a "non-marriage cake" even more ridiculous.

Public accommodation laws have been in place for decades - the last group to have to fight for service is now seen as a non issue. If you want to discriminate open a private club.


And much of the "ailments" suffered were due to actions and words of the bakery owners.
While I would have told them to screw off if they denied me service I can understand how planning one of the most special days in a couples lives being ruined by a hateful individual (who later posted the lesbian couples name, address, and phone number on their Facebook) could have a severe impact on ones affect.

You don't even know the facts of the case - but continue to rant, they will continue to enjoy the half mill they have raised off the backs of other bigots.

 

Apparently, BDSM isn't an unsual sexual experience.

 

The premise is that public accommodation laws are justified. That might deserve a thread of it's own. Why should we have such laws to begin with?