OR moves to seize property from couple who refused to bake cake for lesbian wedding

Requiring the business to serve everyone equally doesn't infringe upon the religious freedom of the owners.

 

If they advertise a service to the public then at minimum they be facing false advertising claims for failure to provide said services. Freedom of religion does not give one the ability to blatantly discriminate against groups - it simply entails your ability to believe whatever you want.

No one is attempting to alter their beliefs, instead they are expected to honor goods they have for sale. If they want to practice a religion they are free to open a church.

 

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

The exercising of ones religion isn't limited to thoughts in ones mind. No doubt if it were up to the democrats, the right of religion would be limited to mere thoughts.

 

Actually, they are free to discriminate against ANYONE they like as long as it not on the basis of their race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age. If you don't like the way they cut their hair, you can refuse to provide service.

 

Oh you know that the heterosexuals are just lining up to get their "freak on". LOL

 

So no limit exists on "the free exercise" of religion? Care to discuss the various commandments of forced servitude, rape, and murder in various religious texts (remember, this doesn't just extend to the current Christian interpretation).

Of course limits apply, the free exercise ends when you break law or injure someone, both of which occurred in this case. Again - this is a bakery, not a place of worship.

 

My problem with your theory is when there is a "We're Open" sign on the front of the door. I have no problems with true, private entities, like churches and religious organizations, engage in this activity. My problem is when these "private businesses" that are open and allows THE PUBLIC in, then they may be private to allow certain criteria in employment, benefits, etc., but the buck stops when they open their doors and allow anyone in. Here is the deal. Would they have been open to denying an interracial couple a cake? Mixed religion people that wanted a cake that showed both religious ideas espoused?

Here is the deal. Even if you wanted to discriminate against someone based on sexual orientation, it gets far more murky when marital status is placed in there. Every state and the federal government does not allow discrimination based on gender and/or marital status and for that, even though Oregon does not allow discrimination based on sexual orientation, it opens other avenues to sue. In other words, since same sex marriage is now the law of the land, marital status can not be discriminated against for gay couples. It also opens the door that gender of the couple, in question, can not be used as a means of discrimination. Some stuff is murky, but other things are clear.

 

What business is going to hire someone just to make a cake? Why not contract another baker?
That makes the most sense.

Call it a belief system. That's what the entire rest of the world calls it.
A belief system that has no affect on your life.

 

You're wrong, but if you weren't that would show just how ridiculous this judgement is.

That baker doesn't make "civil commitment" cakes for heteros either.

 

That is the ticket. Let me call my competitor because I am too f***ing stupid to provide a service to someone I feel icky about. Yeah, my business will fail in less than 6 months.

 

Its not amazing to me. The business did not historically require proof of a bone fide marriage license before they baked wedding cakes for staights anymore that it required a birth certificate before it made birthday cakes. . As everyone has always said, the ceremony and the legalities are not the same thing. Gays have been told to be satisfied with the ceremony, and forget the license and here the ceremony is endangered.

The state of Oregon was obeying federal law as it was understood, before the recent decision changed the prevailing view. This business was disobeying Oregon law.

 

There is a separation of church and state. What that means, is that the government cannot discriminate between religious and non-religious people. If a non-religious person refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, that would be considered hate discrimination. Therefore, if a religious person refuses to bake a cake, it should also be considered hate discrimination. The religious and non-religious person should not be treated any differently, under the law. To do so, would be religious discrimination, in itself.

 

That wasn't the point of my post, but I'll rephrase. Serving people as required by law does not infringe on the owners' religious rights.

 

If that makes the most sense, then great. Whatever helps the business stay within the law.

A belief system rooted in hate. That's all the threat of hell is. "I don't like you, and you're gonna get it!"

You're honestly going to say that in a thread all about how this belief system, via the believers, had a negative effect on the lives of people outside of it?

 

If the Christian Baker, with a following of loyal Christian customers , then he should
countersue the LGBT funded hit squad of 2 activist lesbians for damages to both himself and to his other Christian customers. The Christian customers selected this particular Bakery with expectations that the Baker, being a Christian, had vow of dutiful obedience to the Christian God's laws forbiding certain behavior, of which homosexuality is considered to be one which that God finds to be an abomination. So therefore, the LGBT couple,, were demanding an unreasonable service to be performed which if the Baker complied, would then be insulting the greater majority of his Christian customers as well as quite possibly some % of hetersexual traditional marriage customers.

 

You gotta understand progressives and progressive activists only support choice (in this case numerious bakeries) when it's a woman wanting to abort her child...

Any normal gay couple would just find a baker that would bake their cake, however this couple is NOT normal - these people are part of the gay agenda and they're attacking this business to promoted the gay agenda..

I personally could care less about homosexuality - doesn't affect me one bit, however I do have a problem with the gay agenda and their cunning attempts at shoving homosexuality down peoples throats and (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s alike that SHOULD be discriminated against because they're useless and disgusting people going out of their way to find trouble...

Not only that but these same clowns believe businesses are slaves to the general public (and their employees) which is a double whammy for me to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing hate them..

Only normal gay people that don't make their sexuality the focus of who they are as people get cakes - the gay progressive SJW's can bake their own cakes..

 

The bottom line is that the so called 'Christian' bakery broke the law. Why should they be excused when others who break the law are not excused?

 

No law was broken and this is activist nonsense by progressive state SC justices...

Please show me where in ANY constitution homosexuals have the RIGHT to buy a cake or given service for anything?

Using the very vague amendments used here it would be discrimination to sell 10-year old cigarettes..

Oh and the state isn't going to take their property because they know they can't...

Also, you do realize the FIRST AMENDMENT is a guaranteed right do you not? service to homosexuals is NOT...

 

I would love to be in this position because I would straight up refuse to bake the cake - not because they're a lesbian couple - but because they're SJW's and I don't like SJW's and I don't have to do business with people I don't like...

You gotta love these (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s that believe they're entitled... The entire progressive philosophy revolves around entitlement - it's disgusting..

 

They broke Oregon law; it's that simple.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, you do have to do business with people you don't like. Otherwise, you are breaking the law.

 

No I'm not...

No shoes, no shirts, no progressives...

You're just making (*)(*)(*)(*) up because you don't even understand the "law"..

Please cite the law for me if you're so sure.

 

http://www.oregon.gov/boli/CRD/pages/c_crprotoc.aspx

You are not allowed to discriminate against people due to sexual orientation.

Happy reading.

"The Civil Rights Division of the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) enforces Oregon´s civil rights laws. These laws ban discrimination against individuals because of characteristics that make them part of a protected class. Anyone claiming to have been discriminated against at work, in a place where the public is served such as a restaurant or a hotel, when buying or renting housing or when applying for or attending a career school can file a complaint with the BOLI´s Civil Rights Division...

Protected classes include:

Race / color
National origin
Sex (includes gender, pregnancy and sexual harassment)
Sexual orientation
Religion
Retaliation for opposing an unlawful employment practice
Association with a member of a protected class
Age (18 or older)
Marital status
Physical/Mental disability (6 or more employees)
Injured workers (6 or more employees)
Family relationship. "

 

That isn't law that is a complaint form..

LOL typical progressive...

Please show me the law?

 

There was a case similar to this here in England about three years ago. Two of them set up a couple of bed and breakfast owners and destroyed their lives.

 

That's because the UK loves to use fascism to enforce political correctness...

I don't know much about your laws so I cannot really say if the government had any legality in their fascism in that case, however I do know mine and there is no law saying gays are protected.