Best
403 Comments
Post
  • #14
    !
    No, it wouldn't. He has every right to his religion, but once he entered the public marketplace he subjected himself to the laws of the jurisdiction his business is in. Did God really tell him not to sell cakes to gays? If so, then my God says smoke herb daily.
  • R Load more replies

  • #20
    !
    I believe Christians have a right to be Christian. I do not believe they have a right to force their beliefs on everyone else. BTW: your God is a ----- if he tells you not to sell cakes to gays.
  • #43
    !
    @PauldenZangpo First of all I am a capitalist to the core. I am a money dog so I will sell anything legal that anyone wants to buy. I am also an atheist who accept NO God as a higher authority. Having said all that, when a gay "zone" of business can start an association and openly lean on property owners not to rent storefronts to non gays in that zone and nobody, not the politicians, not the ACLU, NOBODY sees this as a violation of human rights then I don't give a damn if some bakers don't want to make cakes for gays. It's his loss. Go to gay bakery. Make them wealthy.
  • #85
    !
    of course they have the right to be gay, just like you have the right to be bald or have a small willy... not only that, but, in this case it's the 'religious' guy who is trying to force his beliefs onto everyone else. he can be as religious as he pleases... in private, but not in his business.
  • #129
    !
    What belief?
    The only thing happening is discrimination against someone (multiple someones) because of sexual orientation. And that's illegal if you're a business owner.
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    It's only a matter of time before we hear of a bakery refusing service to Christians. They wouldn't dare deny service to a Muslim, but Christians are on the list of groups that are considered politically correct to bully.
  • #70
    !
    Why don't you Christians start acting like Christians? I find it impossible to believe that a carpenter speared, flailed, and crucified who shouted to the heavens "forgive them father," would refuse to repair his neighbor's roof because they were gay.
  • #263
    !
    @PauldenZangpo-- Why don't you fundy secularists start practicing what you preach. Tolerance means tolerating views and people that you don't agree with. What about the rights of the business owner? Why are you fundy secularists so intolerant of people living according to the dictates of their own consciences when they conflict with your world view?
  • #268
    !
    @harold_lloyd-- I don't have any stories about bakeries. I'll let you know if I come across any. But here's a few examples of intolerance of Christians from college campuses across the country to tide you over.

    Catholic Gonzaga University won’t allow Catholic students to form Catholic group

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/06/catholic-go...

    DePaul student admits vandalizing pro-life display, claims it somehow violated his rights

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/14/depaul-stud...

    Johns Hopkins denies recognition to pro-lifers, equates them with white supremacists

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/01/johns-hopki...

    And let's not forget about the IRS scandal. Remember that the IRS has been targeting pro-life groups in addition to Tea Party groups. That could be thought of as a "denial of service."
  • #284
    !
    @Bobolinsky You didn't address my question-at all. One persons intolerance does not justify yours. That is the justification of an immature mind. I tolerate Christians holding me captive to their prayers at secular events, not in the name of tolerance, but because my faith requires me to love my brother as I love myself. (BTW: Also a Christian tenet) Your mock offense at another's intolerance to your bigotry is intellectually dishonest. (It also clearly demonstrates your indoctrination by the right wing media)
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    What happened to freedom of religion, speech assembly and so forth. Or a businesses right to refuse, i mean for gods sake this is just rediculous and could only take place in the PC forget the constitution America being forged.
    And that crap arguement of well he owns a business so he should loose his rights is exactly crap.
  • #106
    !
    @Arumizy -- Businesses in this country haven't had the unfettered right to refuse service for nearly 50 years, ever since anti-discrimination laws were enacted in the 1960's.
  • #152
    !
    Freedom of religion is being turned into freedom FROM religion and the Christians are being BULLIED into silence. Truth is, certain groups have gone beyond a demand for equality to taking revenge, and the courts are allowing it. This incident isn't about equality. It's about getting even.
  • #259
    !
    Whats REALLY strange is colorado does NOT recognize same sex marriage.
    How could the attorney general file a complaint of discrimination when the state of Colorado is ALSO engaging in the EXACT SAME discrimination????
  • #18
    !
    Pay the fine and do the jail time. He has the right to refuse service to whomever whyever. Call me crazy but surely he isn't the only baker in Colorado? So instead the gays are forcing their lifestyle and agenda on someone who doesn't agree instead of just saying yup we are different and we don't have to see eye to eye on everything so we will move along. Can't wait for the Supreme Court to uphold doma.
  • #23
    !
    Better yet, I'd start sending the Colorado attorney general and ACLU the bills for running the business and remind them to pay them on time, I don't want my credit rating fouled up.
  • #95
    !
    @dances-weebles from what i understand any business can refuse business for whatever reason they want. instead of whining just go to the next place who wants the business.
  • #103
    !
    @tomincali -- your understanding is pretty flawed. Business owners have not had the unfettered right to refuse service since the enactment of anti-discrimination laws 50 years ago.
  • #121
    !
    If you are denied service for any reason, you can either find an alternate, or provide your own service. That's the point of freedom in the first place. Can't expect lib-fascists to understand that concept.
  • R Load more replies

  • #16
    !
    First, gay marriage wasn't legal in Colorado in 2012...it just became legal May 1,'13. So why should the baker have to make a cake for a celebration that's not legal in his state?

    And shouldn't the baker have a choice in what cakes he bakes? Gays certainly want their choice...why couldn't they have chosen another baker for heaven's sake?
  • #110
    !
    Holding a same-gender marriage ceremony was not illegal in 2012 ... the law just stated that the state wouldn't recognize them. Likewise for wedding celebrations. Colorado law, however, DOES prohibit refusal of service based on sexual orientation. There is no substantive difference between a wedding cake for straight and same-gender weddings ... the baker refused service strictly on the basis of the sexual orientation of the participants.
  • #135
    !
    @OldDaveNJ
    DENVER May 1, 2013, 2:55 PM "The first same-sex couple granted a civil union in Colorado said their vows before hundreds of people early Wednesday morning at a downtown Denver municipal building where couples and members of the public gathered.

    The new law legalizing civil unions took effect at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, and both Denver and Boulder began issuing licenses immediately."

    "new law" does mean making legal, does it not? Therefore it wasn't legal prior to that time.
  • #139
    !
    @ACTSmom -- "legalizing" is a poor choice of words. It means that civil unions are recognized with certain rights and benefits by the state. It does not in any way suggest that same-gender marriage ceremonies were somehow illegal prior to that date.
  • #158
    !
    @OldDaveNJ ,,,What?? Then why did they begin issuing licenses only at 12 a.m. when it became legal to do so? I do not understand your "logic" at all.
  • #162
    !
    @ACTSmom -- It's not that complicated. The civil unions law has only to do with state recognition of same-gender relationships through the granting of certain rights and benefits. Prior to the civil union law going into effect, Colorado didn't recognize such relationships. But that in no way legally precluded private wedding ceremonies and associated celebrations ... and it has nothing to do with this situation. This falls under Colorado state anti-discrimination laws, which prohibit refusal of service to people based on their sexual orientation.
  • R Load more replies

  • #97
    !
    The baker is the owner. He can refuse service to anyone.
    As for the gay couple...why do you want to patronize this business? Is it just to prove you can? Get over it and find someone else.
    I have no problem if your gay, but taking away my right to refuse service could cause problems.
    Now, shut up, get married, and learn to bake.
  • #42
    !
    because it forces him to in some way support it. It is why I have often said I support the rights of gays to marry, but oppose the gay agenda.
  • #104
    !
    I,m sure there are bakers that would have been glad to make cake,would have taken a few phone call probably,but they wanted the attention and chance to bully the baker knowing the liberal public would support them
  • #111
    !
    @MongoAPillager Shopping around would be the easiest thing to do. There have been cases of lawsuits against Christian bakers in my area as well. It looks as if people who want to refuse service based on sexual orientation, race or religion need to avoid the service industry if they want to stay out of court, because they will be sought out.
  • #116
    !
    @Dan_Tien i,m a christian and a hit of a trouble maker sometimes,but i wouldn,tbe all that upset if barnes and nobles refused to sell bibles.i belive this baker may be made to sell them a cake,but he can use artistic license to decorate anyway he please,s??such as figures of 2 guys with circle cancel emblem
    ?

    !
  • #119
    !
    @MongoAPillager I'm not a Christian, but I wouldn't agree with a bookstore refusing to sell Bibles. I don't think your decorations idea would float. I've seen customers at bakeries go ballistic over smaller details than that.

    I tried my hand working in retail while I was in high school. It sucked. Some people just want to work out on you.
  • #126
    !
    @Dan_Tien i,m just saying thar legally they probably could force him to sell a cake,but i believe he would stillmaintain the freedom to decorate it any way he pleases?
  • R Load more replies

  • #13
    !
    Money is money. Religion is religion.
    I would have done the cakes and let God handle it. It's not my business to judge others state of living, regardless of my belief system.
    Whatever happened to "State" being separate from "church"?
    This couple is demanding service. Your "reserve right to refuse service" sign must be prominently displayed.
    Do not give reasons, unavailable.
  • #248
    !
    If the business were run by an atheist refusing to serve a christian, the place would be burnt down or subjected to a drive by shooting.

    Gay people are born that way. Discriminating against gay couples is no more "religious freedom" than discriminating against blacks or jews. It's bigotry.
  • #143
    !
    Actually he is entitled to his religious beliefs and the couple can just deal with their "feelings" like grownups. The baker isn't responsible for their "feelings". "The law" is in violation of the religious rights of Christians and should be amended. The gays rights do not trump the Christians rights. There has to be a balance.
  • #30
    !
    I wonder why a black barber can refuse to cut white hair doesn't go to jail but a person who doesn't want to make cakes for gays can?
  • #54
    !
    Hmmmm...

    The same reason you can't sue a Kosher catering service for not providing Ham and Bacon bagels bites when catering a secular wedding?

    Oh....wait a minute....that's all the same thing.

    "We Reserve The Right To Refuse Service To Anyone."
  • #67
    !
    Cutting AA hair is quite different from cutting most types of white hair. Many AA barbers don't feel qualified to cut white hair, so any refusal to do so may be based on professional standards, not personal prejudice. Many white barbers don't do AA hair for the same reason.

    On the other hand, cake is cake.

    Personally, I'm all for the fine, but not crazy about the prison part; it's a bit overboard, and prisons are crowded and costly enough.
  • #71
    !
    @cpeter133 So you have an excuse for discrimination just as long as it's not a white straight guy doing it. I already knew that.
  • #74
    !
    @AntiPorcheria Not the same thing; a kosher caterer or restaurant prepares certain foods; any goy can buy them, but they arent required to prepare anything beyond their standard menu.

    It'd be the same thing if the kosher company required proof of your status as a jew.
  • #75
    !
    @cpeter133 now you are insulting AA barbers by saying they are less skilled then the women working at my local Great Clips.
  • R Load more replies

  • #27
    !
    Retail businesses, while privately owned, are considered by the courts to be "places of public accommodation." In other words, their primary purpose is to sell to the general public, which necessarily makes them susceptible to equal protection laws. And arbitrary refusals to serve patrons are illegal.

    Where does it stop? Can a proprietor refuse to sell to someone who has tattoos? Or who has a lazy eye? Or who has his hair dyed pink and cut in a mohawk? Or to green-eyed or one-armed or toothless patrons? Or to a couple whose lifestyle is personally offensive? The answer is NO.
  • #38
    !
    Excellent point. Before I commented, I researched right to refusal laws. Arbitrary is the operative word. A Christian pharmacist can refuse to sell emergency contraception, but a Christian baker has no standing to refuse service on religious grounds. Now if there were 11 Commandments, the 11th being, "Thou Shalt No Sell Baked Goods To Gays", this bigot baker would be safe.
  • #46
    !
    Wrongl The answer is yes. People who are stupid enough to refuse to ply their trade to another because of virtually any reason should have that right. That much sooner they go broke.
  • #283
    !
    So if I decide that my accountant should also give foot massages, I can petition the government to force this business to also offer foot massages? When does a business owner lose the right to decide how their business is operated? Where do you draw the line?
    If I decide to open a bakery, but do not offer wedding cakes, that is perfectly legal, and (I would hope) no one could change that. However if I offered only heterosexual wedding cakes, a court could force me to do otherwise? This is a matter of homosexuals usong the government to force SOCIAL acceptance, which is an abuse of the system. If a baker refuses to make them a cake, they can simply go to another baker. If enough business is being directed to the competition, that may just change the owners mind. If not, then at least you know you are rewarding those who operate in a way you agree with. That is how the free market works, but we have too many people trying to use the power of govt to force specific businesses to operate the way they want, and in such instances the govt is overstepping its bounds.
    On a side note: I worked in the service industry (retail) while I was in college. As a result of that experience, I try to be sure not to make things difficult for employees of places I am patronizing. However, I make a special point not to antagonize (or do anything that may be misinterpretted as antagonizing) people who will be handling my food before the food is in my possession. Do you really want to eat cake that was made by a baker who you forced to serve you against their will? Just a thought...
  • #312
    !
    @The_Bald_Guy I agree with you, I also think that the leaders of the gay agenda (of which dances w weebles will tell you there is no such thing) use instances like this to do exactly what you said. I think they stage these things in order to put yet another daily story in the press orgy about their boo-hoo status and discrimination oagainst. I also agree with you about people preparing your food, I have been in the restaurant industry my whole life, first as a cook, then after school working on the equipment. BUT, and this is a big BUT, I wouldn't doubt it if the people who demanded that cake wouldn't mind the special sauce the cook put in and probably would enjoy it more, negating his would be, get back at them.
  • #348
    !
    @CATTLEPROD it is a problem that isnt limited to any one group, honestly. Since the govt is not stayingwithin its bounds, people are using govt to force others to do what they want.
    For instance: I hate cigarette smoke. I do not like to be exposed to it, I detest getting the smell on my clothes, and so if a business allows smoking inside, I take mu business elsewhere. As a result of several people doing this, most businesses had banned smoking in my area. But some people resented that others were allowed to do thimgs they disagree with and now the govt here has banned smoking in businesses, including bars. they believe that since they want to do business there, they have a right to use the force of law to control how the business is operated. It is none of the govts business, and as a consumer you (general you, I imagine I am preaching to the choir here) have no business using the force of govt to ban smoking. Unfortunately, we have far too many people who use the govt as a nanny to force others to play by their rules than viewing it as an entity that should regulate to ensure fair competition and penalize people and businesses for actually harming someone.
    We see the same with gun control. They want to make owning or selling guns so onerous that people simply give up and dont do it. Why? Because they dont like guns and therefore no one ahould have them.
    And now in this story, were these people harmed by being refused service? No. They simply had to go elsewhere, meaning in the end it was the baker that was penalized. Instead, they threw themselves on the ground and kicked and screamed over being told no (I would have been whipped for such behavior as a child) and used the govt to force this baker to give them what they want. Why? Because the baker dared to not condone their lifestyle, and so they use force to be accepted socially.
    It is an epidemic in this country. The govt is not a person or groups personal bludgeon.
  • R Load more replies

  • #21
    !
    This is the kind of political correctness bull$hit that starts shooting sprees. Leave the poor people alone and guit pushing your queer agenda on other people. Some people will not change do to their beliefs. I am one of them. You try to throw me in jail because of my Christian beliefs you will have a war on your hands.
  • #12
    !
    Your 1st Amendment rights are no longer absolute once you enter the public square by opening a business. Besides, where in the Bible is selling a cake to a gay couple a sin? That being said, this case is ridiculous, frivolous, outrageous. You have too much time on your hands if you seek a legal remedy over a cake. Both parties are acting like petulant children. Time to put the gays and Christians in the closet.
  • #256
    !
    Where in the Constution does it say you forfeit your first amendment rights by opening a business?

    Unless this baker has a monopoly on wedding cakes, which is another issue entirely, the couple can just find another baker.
  • #282
    !
    @Libertyboy Where in the Constitution does it say yelling fire in a crowded theater is not a protected Freedom of Speech? If you require a Constitutional basis for laws against arbitrary denial of business service, look no further then the 10th Amendment. They could and should have found another baker; doesn't change the fact he violated laws established by we the people.
  • R Load more comments...
Post