Bakers Ordered to Pay $135,000 for Refusing Gay Wedding Service

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

well it is not about gays marrying, it is about the ridiculous fine, which was probably set to high to encourage other bakeries to comply.

No shoes
No shirt
No service

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Your argument is invalid. Nobody has demanded a christian baker make a wedding cake in the shape of two dudes mid-coitus.

In fact, in each case the request was for a simple wedding cake with no extraneous pieces, or any writing that said "Gosh gay sex is awesome!" or anything like that.

Yes, a muslim baker can refuse to make a pig-shaped cake. I very much doubt such a baker would even have a pig-shaped mould to pour the batter into.

Yes, A christian baker can refuse to make a cake in the shape of a penis.

However, they cannot outright REFUSE to make ANY cake for the customer because someone is gay. Just as a Muslim baker cannot REFUSE to make a cake for a customer because they like bacon.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

The article says the baker serves gays daily and chats to them also but refuses to make gay wedding cakes. Plenty of bakeries wouldn't such as those that are Jewish or Muslim, they would say ''no''.

There are other examples of bakeries being sued for not decorating gay wedding cakes.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

In fact, in each case the request was for a simple wedding cake with no extraneous pieces, or any writing that said "Gosh gay sex is awesome!" or anything like that.

This is what I don't get....the cake request was a simple one; nothing at all out of the ordinary. As a hetero male, I could walk into the same bakery and buy a cake for a LGBT wedding without telling the baker what the cake was actually for; and they would gladly sell it to me. So, in essence, they still would have sold a "gay" cake. Therefore, I can only come to the conclusion that this is not about the baker's religious freedom, this is simply about bigotry and the disgust of having a LGBT inside their establishment.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

The article says the baker serves gays daily and chats to them also but refuses to make gay wedding cakes. Plenty of bakeries wouldn't such as those that are Jewish or Muslim, they would say ''no''.

There are other examples of bakeries being sued for not decorating gay wedding cakes.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Do you have an example from the U.S.?

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

It's not a gay wedding cake, it's a wedding cake for a gay wedding. It's subtle but there's a big difference.

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

well it is not about gays marrying, it is about the ridiculous fine, which was probably set to high to encourage other bakeries to comply.

This is what everybody is ignoring.


$135,000!

What could possibly be the reason for that?

Hmmm.

a reply to: Seamrog

I think the fine is over the top, as well. That's what I don't agree with, is the amount of the fine.

The bakery was already crucified in the court of public opinion. The fine on top of that pretty much ruined them. A fine is meant to be a punishment to a business or person, not a death sentence.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

I think the fine was too low, I think they should have to sign over the bakery!

a reply to: Seamrog

Yep the fine is horrendous, and I think you'll find few who disagree with that aspect of things. I've spent a good long time arguing against such fines in the past as a member of the LGBT community.

That said arguing the fine is excessive is an entirely separate argument from whether the wrong that brought about the fine was in fact a wrong in the first place.

Two wrongs have been committed, one being the cake baking refusal.

And the other being the excessive fine for this wrong.

Arguing FOR the bake caking refusal is NOT arguing against the fine's excessiveness.

Arguing against the excessive fine, WHILE acknowledging that the first wrong was still a wrong IS.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but both wrongs are still wrongs and deserve their due for what they are.

I wonder how many more cases there will have to be before people understand that their religion does not exempt them from following the law.

They can disagree with the law and they can try to get the law changed, but if they break the law the results will not be in their favor.

At least in this case the guy was willing to face the consequences. Seems like he knew ahead of time that this could make or break him.

Klein says that he’s willing to accept whatever penalties the government seeks to punish him with for exercising his Christian convictions.

“If I have to be penalized for my beliefs, … that’ll be what it is,” he said, affirming to reporters that he would rather close than compromise his faith.

There are other examples of bakers being sued for not decorating cakes due ethics, it is all stupid whichever the message or group, as I have said before bakeries should have a disclaimer.

All the LGBT community caused by their suing bakeries resulted in all bakeries being forced to write anything. It has caused a dysfunction of etiquette. For example a black bakery was forced making a KKK cake. The result of stupid victim mentality that sues anyone that doesn't agree to them has a flip side. Is that the sort of society they want?. Now gay bakers are being forced to make ''god hates gays'' cakes.

hotair.com...
www.lifesitenews.com...
www.foxnews.com...
washingtonweeklynews.com...

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: Stormdancer777

I think the fine was too low, I think they should have to sign over the bakery!

Why? Other than you simply dislike them, what justification is there for something that extreme? Did the complainant lose hundreds of thousands of dollars? Where there hundreds of thousands worth of damages?

I would direct you to the 8th Amendment to the Constitution:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Can you give a link to one example where a baker lost a case due to not decorating a cake the way the customer wanted.

Just because someone brought a lawsuit does not mean much of anything. If they won the suit then that is a different story.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Now gay bakers are being forced to make ''god hates gays'' cakes.

I wonder how one goes about finding a gay bakery? Unless their establishment is named Big Gay Bakery; then again, gay could simply mean happy.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: Stormdancer777

I think the fine was too low, I think they should have to sign over the bakery!

Why? Other than you simply dislike them, what justification is there for something that extreme? Did the complainant lose hundreds of thousands of dollars? Where there hundreds of thousands worth of damages?

I would direct you to the 8th Amendment to the Constitution:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Exactly. The fine was excessive. If I were the bakery owner, I'd be fighting it.

I hope they are.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I was wondering what crawled up... and now he's gone...
THE world is all over the place ,trying to group it is your first step to failure.
It's NEVER going to be THAT easy to figure out.

a reply to: NavyDoc

If I own a shoe store and a man comes in and asked to try on some ladies shoes and I refuse because I find it offensive then I have no business being open to the public. If the shoe fits properly, who am I to judge? If I walk into the bakery and ask them to make me a cake of crap and they refuse then that is proper, if I asked them to make me the same cake as they made for a friend of mine with only one minor change that has absolutely no bearing on the cake itself and I refuse because I disagree with the persons appearance or outward affiliation then shame on me.

Being in business comes with responsibility, if you are not capable of setting aside your own bigotry then you deserve to be put out of business. Keep your morals and your high falluting ideals of what is right or wrong in your back pocket or be prepared to empty said back pockets.

I want a cake in the shape of a gun and you won't make it for me, fine that is your right, I want a cake with gun shapes on it, that is your right to not make it without the shapes. You can not refuse to make me a cake because I am a gun advocate and you disagree.

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: NavyDoc

If I own a shoe store and a man comes in and asked to try on some ladies shoes and I refuse because I find it offensive then I have no business being open to the public. If the shoe fits properly, who am I to judge? If I walk into the bakery and ask them to make me a cake of crap and they refuse then that is proper, if I asked them to make me the same cake as they made for a friend of mine with only one minor change that has absolutely no bearing on the cake itself and I refuse because I disagree with the persons appearance or outward affiliation then shame on me.

Being in business comes with responsibility, if you are not capable of setting aside your own bigotry then you deserve to be put out of business. Keep your morals and your high falluting ideals of what is right or wrong in your back pocket or be prepared to empty said back pockets.

I want a cake in the shape of a gun and you won't make it for me, fine that is your right, I want a cake with gun shapes on it, that is your right to not make it without the shapes. You can not refuse to make me a cake because I am a gun advocate and you disagree.

You didn't answer the question at all. What damages did the complainant received that merited over a hundred thousand dollars and and want more damages?

You certainly can deny me services due to my politics--being a gun advocate is not a protected class. You an discriminate against me to your heart's content.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: NavyDoc

If I own a shoe store and a man comes in and asked to try on some ladies shoes and I refuse because I find it offensive then I have no business being open to the public. If the shoe fits properly, who am I to judge? If I walk into the bakery and ask them to make me a cake of crap and they refuse then that is proper, if I asked them to make me the same cake as they made for a friend of mine with only one minor change that has absolutely no bearing on the cake itself and I refuse because I disagree with the persons appearance or outward affiliation then shame on me.

Being in business comes with responsibility, if you are not capable of setting aside your own bigotry then you deserve to be put out of business. Keep your morals and your high falluting ideals of what is right or wrong in your back pocket or be prepared to empty said back pockets.

I want a cake in the shape of a gun and you won't make it for me, fine that is your right, I want a cake with gun shapes on it, that is your right to not make it without the shapes. You can not refuse to make me a cake because I am a gun advocate and you disagree.

You didn't answer the question at all. What damages did the complainant received that merited over a hundred thousand dollars and and want more damages?

You certainly can deny me services due to my politics--being a gun advocate is not a protected class. You an discriminate against me to your heart's content.

1) hurt feelings. Hurt feelings are worth a lot.

2) as long as nobody discriminates against you for being Doc.

Nobody messes with Doc.

Except his Marines