Progressive government taking away the rights and liberties of once-free people. Astounding.


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/06/state-silences-bakers-who-refused-to-bake-cake-for-lesbians.html?intcmp=latestnews





Still can't believe what I just read.

This thread should go in the politics forum.

Anyway, haven't you heard? These days it is illegal to hurt anybody's feelz.

A $135,000 fine? For damages? What damages. A cake is worth maybe $500 at most. Then a gag order to squelch their free speech. What?!?! Tell that government regulator to go screw himself; I would sue the hell out of them. Talk about tyranny; they seem to be getting their marching orders from Pennsylvania Ave.

Life goes on people.

I hope they sue and win millions.

QuakerOats;1739158 wrote:A $135,000 fine? For damages? What damages.

I forget exactly, but I remember seeing something about "pain, suffering and emotional distress"...apparently this had a profoundly disruptive impact on their emotional and physical well being. All the trumped up BS you'd expect like headaches, trouble sleeping, weight gain, etc...

Can't remember if they planned to donate any of it or how much. It seems almost, well, militant to potentially put someone out of business because of their religious beliefs. It takes a special kind of POS to do something like that to a small business/family over this. And it's insulting to people who have suffered REAL harm from discrimination.

I never quite understood this stance. If the gays want a cake, go somewhere else. Those people aren't keeping them from going somewhere else.

Spock;1739206 wrote:I never quite understood this stance. If the gays want a cake, go somewhere else. Those people aren't keeping them from going somewhere else.

Because they are being discriminated against?

A tragic oddity: progressive radicals want no government involvement related to the murder of the innocent unborn, yet they ask for and receive the full force of government when someone will not bake a cake for them.

I don't know that there are adequate words to describe the sick and twisted mental disease these whackos have.

QuakerOats;1739264 wrote:A tragic oddity: progressive radicals want no government involvement related to the murder of the innocent unborn, yet they ask for and receive the full force of government when someone will not bake a cake for them.

I don't know that there are adequate words to describe the sick and twisted mental disease these whackos have.

Hey, if a woman wants to kill a little baby early enough along in her pregnancy that is her choice......

FatHobbit;1739260 wrote:Because they are being discriminated against?

But they aren't. It's one thing to say "We don't serve gays here" but its another thing to say "We won't bake a cake for a gay wedding here".

There is a difference and I believe the latter should be perfectly fine.

sleeper;1739269 wrote:But they aren't. It's one thing to say "We don't serve gays here" but its another thing to say "We won't bake a cake for a gay wedding here".

There is a difference and I believe the latter should be perfectly fine.

gosh a ruddies, what? They are refusing to serve.

isadore;1739288 wrote:gosh a ruddies, what? They are refusing to serve.

They don't serve cakes for gay weddings. Forcing them to do so is a violation of their rights.

Should cake shops be forced to make a cake for a KKK meeting?

sleeper;1739291 wrote:They don't serve cakes for gay weddings. Forcing them to do so is a violation of their rights.

Should cake shops be forced to make a cake for a KKK meeting?

should the cake shop be forced to make a cake for a black couple being married? They are refusing to serve.

isadore;1739300 wrote:should the cake shop be forced to make a cake for a black couple being married? They are refusing to serve.

Is the black couple gay? Then no. If not, then yes. Not hard.

The baker isn't preventing them from being married. It's their choice to make a cake for whoever they choose.

What happened to gays marrying "won't affect your way of life"? Hypocrites.

sleeper;1739312 wrote:Is the black couple gay? Then no. If not, then yes. Not hard.

This is actually a good point. More interesting is not only does Title VII not list sexual orientation as a protected class, but that law deals mostly with employment. I'm not sure if rulings/precedents have expanded that case law, but I don't think this was a suit that could be brought federally.

Now, some states, including Oregon, DO list sexual orientation as a protected class. But you have a public business refusing service to a protected class, however I'm not sure that rises to punitive damages.

I don't know if there's any basis for appeal there. And if this would go up the chain, I'm guessing sexual orientation would become a federally protected class.

The gag order sounds fishy, and even if it was part of a reduced penalty I don't believe you can negotiate or contract away your 1st Amendment rights.

sleeper;1739312 wrote:Is the black couple gay? Then no. If not, then yes. Not hard.

even if the bakers belong to a church that does not believe in black marriage, they believe it is a sacrament only available to Caucasians.

TedSheckler;1739319 wrote:The baker isn't preventing them from being married. It's their choice to make a cake for whoever they choose.

What happened to gays marrying "won't affect your way of life"? Hypocrites.

a baker baking a gay marriage cake will obviously destroy their lives.

these bakers arent keeping that gay couple from having a cake at a wedding. THat would be a violation of their rights. THey are simply not doing it for them. THe gays can go down the street and get a cake from someone else.

Should a baker be forced to bake a cake for a straight couple?

Spock;1739330 wrote:these bakers arent keeping that gay couple from having a cake at a wedding. THat would be a violation of their rights. THey are simply not doing it for them. THe gays can go down the street and get a cake from someone else.

An excuse for any bigot, you can just buy it on the next block, next town, next state.

TedSheckler;1739331 wrote:Should a baker be forced to bake a cake for a straight couple?

they should not be denied the service and the product because of the fact they are straight.

isadore;1739344 wrote:they should not be denied the service and the product because of the fact they are straight.

That's not an answer to my question.

TedSheckler;1739350 wrote:That's not an answer to my question.

gosh a ruddies, do you have comprehension problems. A baker should not be able to deny them a marriage cage because they are straight.