"Religious refusal to bake for a gay wedding may cost bakery $135,000"

[Skwim]

PORTLAND, Ore., (Reuters) – An Oregon judge has ruled that the owners of a Portland-area bakery who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple should pay the couple $135,000 in damages, state officials said Tuesday.

Administrative Law Judge Alan McCullough issued a proposed order last week that could mean Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein will have to pay $60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer, and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer, for emotional suffering.

Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation.

The state’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) contends the bakery owners violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws because the shop is not a registered religious institution.
source
​

How sweet.

 

[Wirey]

I hope this reply works, because the last two didn't.

There's a guy who still has to read a letter from each side describing their side of the story, and he decides the final amount. Apparently it's almost always lower. Plus, some religious group is doing a fundraiser for the bakery, so they should make out fine even after the suit.

 

[columbus]

They recovered almost the entire amount of the fine during the first few hours the fund was operative. By the time this is over hopefully the Kleins can take early retirement courtesy of the gay marriage bullies.

Gotta hand it to the Christian martyrs, they are learning how to cash in. GoFundMe again.
Tom

 

[Maponos]

Such things are not winning homosexual people any societal acceptance by forcing people to accept us.

 

[columbus]

Why would any self respecting gay couple even consider giving their business to a shop that is openly homophobic?
Go elsewhere and tell all your friends what scum the owners are.
Tom

 

[suncowiam]

Such things are not winning homosexual people any societal acceptance by forcing people to accept us.

How do you think minorities and women were able gain acceptance? It just came passively? No one had to fight for it?

People like Martin Luther King died to push their respective movement. You being passive just means others like you have to sacrifice more to win you more rights.

If someone discriminated me because I was Vietnamese, oh, I would love to take them out of business. That could be seen as vindictive but I see it as justice so that others don't have to be discriminated at.

 

[Curious George]

Such things are not winning homosexual people any societal acceptance by forcing people to accept us.

Did Brown v. Board of education help win any societal acceptance? Did Loving v. Virginia help interracial couples?

I suppose I see arguments on both sides, but at least these cases got the issues in the open.

 

[dantech]

Why would any self respecting gay couple even consider giving their business to a shop that is openly homophobic?
Go elsewhere and tell all your friends what scum the owners are.
Tom

Dumb question, and I probably sound very ignorant but do gay couples tend to have more gay friends? Do gays prefer the company of gays?

 

[fantome profane]

They recovered almost the entire amount of the fine during the first few hours the fund was operative. By the time this is over hopefully the Kleins can take early retirement courtesy of the gay marriage bullies.

Gotta hand it to the Christian martyrs, they are learning how to cash in. GoFundMe again.
Tom

The funny thing is if they are raising money specifically to pay the damages that were awarded to this gay couple, that means that these fundamental Christians are raising money for the gay couple. I like that.

 

[Mycroft]

PORTLAND, Ore., (Reuters) – An Oregon judge has ruled that the owners of a Portland-area bakery who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple should pay the couple $135,000 in damages, state officials said Tuesday.

Administrative Law Judge Alan McCullough issued a proposed order last week that could mean Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein will have to pay $60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer, and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer, for emotional suffering.

Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation.

The state’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) contends the bakery owners violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws because the shop is not a registered religious institution.
source
​

How sweet.

 

[columbus]

The funny thing is if they are raising money specifically to pay the damages that were awarded to this gay couple, that means that these fundamental Christians are raising money for the gay couple. I like that.

Heh, I know
I meant to make a snarky post about this, but I got interrupted. I like it too.
Tom

 

[Maponos]

How do you think minorities and women were able gain acceptance? It just came passively? No one had to fight for it?

People like Martin Luther King died to push their respective movement. You being passive just means others like you have to sacrifice more to win you more rights.

If someone discriminated me because I was Vietnamese, oh, I would love to take them out of business. That could be seen as vindictive but I see it as justice so that others don't have to be discriminated at.

Did those movements actually kill these feelings? No, because they can't and won't.

Forcing people to accept you could cause catastrophic backfires because such cases like these could be rallying cries for people to form organised resistances against homosexual people and could gain heavy traction.

I think a lack of foresight is a problem plaguing the West today.

That is very vindictive and very childlike as well. People should be allowed to be as discriminating as they please because it's their business. I really detest this whole entitled attitude people have.

 

[columbus]

Dumb question, and I probably sound very ignorant but do gay couples tend to have more gay friends? Do gays prefer the company of gays?

It not a dumb question. I'm not even sure I can answer it confidently. Largely because gay people and gay couples aren't the same, in the sense that the ones that hook up permanently are unusual. My belief is that will change, but that's how it is now in my experience.

Personally I don't have any gay friends really. I just have more in common with other middle aged married people. I think single gay people tend to mostly have gay friends, but I haven't been one in a long time. And I tend to be a prudish conservative, with little patience for closets, promiscuity, PCness and Drama.

When I said "tell all your friends" I didn't necessarily mean gay ones. The demographic most likely to splurge on pricey weddings are youngish adults with good incomes. They tend to be very opposed to homophobic behavior and quite willing to vote with their checkbook. I think the market will be very hard on openly hostile wedding businesses in the foreseeable future.
Tom

 

[psychoslice]

Yea I'm all for the gay's.

 

[gsa]

Did those movements actually kill these feelings? No, because they can't and won't.

Forcing people to accept you could cause catastrophic backfires because such cases like these could be rallying cries for people to form organised resistances against homosexual people and could gain heavy traction.

I think a lack of foresight is a problem plaguing the West today.

That is very vindictive and very childlike as well. People should be allowed to be as discriminating as they please because it's their business. I really detest this whole entitled attitude people have.

"The West" is much larger than, say, Greece and other nations with ultranationalist movements seemingly on the cusp of achieving unprecedented political power. The United States did not eliminate racism and sexism with the passage of the civil rights acts, but we did change the public atmosphere and raised the level of civic discourse. We also gave people remedies to address discrimination in the housing, labor and commercial markets.

No one is being forced to accept gay people or homosexuality. They are being forced to serve them, as customers, to hire them, as qualified applicants, to house them, as prospective tenants This is quite different from forcing acceptance.

Incidentally, it is also something that every person within the EU takes for granted because it is mandatory to implement these protections. This is unfortunately not the case in the US.

 

[suncowiam]

Did those movements actually kill these feelings? No, because they can't and won't.

Well, at least you are open and honest about your response.

If you believe victory can only be achieved by eliminating discrimination to 0% so why try, then you're absolutely right. I agree that will never happen. But to say that those movements didn't dramatically lessen discrimination, then you are absolutely wrong. Quick examples include slavery, segregation, voting... Oh also, I would never argue that MLK's death had no impact on us as a nation or that it didn't advance the civil rights movement of his time.

Forcing people to accept you could cause catastrophic backfires because such cases like these could be rallying cries for people to form organised resistances against homosexual people and could gain heavy traction.
I think a lack of foresight is a problem plaguing the West today.

This is just another defeatist argument like your first argument. So what if they organize and rally? It's their right to do so. I and others will still be here fighting for gay rights. I'm not going anywhere and I'm firm on where I stand. So that's fine, we can continue this struggle for long as it takes. It's a democratic republic.

Have you lived outside the West? Being a first generation immigrant, I think most Americans just don't know how good they really have it. Your rights and quality of living are unquestionably better than other non-western nations.

That is very vindictive and very childlike as well. People should be allowed to be as discriminating as they please because it's their business. I really detest this whole entitled attitude people have.

Cases like these can be vindictive as I've already admitted. I don't think it's childlike though. This is very much an adult response. I think these cases are absolutely needed. It forces all America to take a stand on the subject.

Your discrimination argument is a slippery slope for other types of infrastructural businesses like healthcare and security. Then there's general employment...

 

[Breathe]

Whatever happened to "We refuse the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"?

​

When did this become this?

​

It was their choice not to do it; they should've lost custom and nothing else -- they should not been fined as it's their own business. This whole lawsuit thing is a pile of ****. If it was seriously over a cake then they would've just gotten a cake elsewhere. Oh, wait, this isn't about the cake; I doubt it ever was. More than likely just an excuse to attack people. I doubt many so-called 'supporters' care about the right to the cake or the gay couple; for many, it's just an excuse to be nasty and wank off to the thought of religious people getting fined.

Now, before anyone gets butthurt and hysterical, I support gay marriage.​

 

[Shad]

PORTLAND, Ore., (Reuters) – An Oregon judge has ruled that the owners of a Portland-area bakery who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple should pay the couple $135,000 in damages, state officials said Tuesday.

Administrative Law Judge Alan McCullough issued a proposed order last week that could mean Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein will have to pay $60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer, and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer, for emotional suffering.

Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation.

The state’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) contends the bakery owners violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws because the shop is not a registered religious institution.
source
​

How sweet.

The bakerer also tried to break the law by setting up a donation drive to pay for their fees. It is amazing how people think they can break the law due to their religion.

GoFundMe Cancels Sweet Cakes By Melissa Fundraising Campaign, Bakers Blame 'Satan' - The New Civil Rights Movement

 

[Shad]

Whatever happened to "We refuse the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"?

​

When did this become this?

​

It was their choice not to do it; they should've lost custom and nothing else -- they should not been fined as it's their own business. This whole lawsuit thing is a pile of ****. If it was seriously over a cake then they would've just gotten a cake elsewhere. Oh, wait, this isn't about the cake; I doubt it ever was. More than likely just an excuse to attack people. I doubt many so-called 'supporters' care about the right to the cake or the gay couple; for many, it's just an excuse to be nasty and wank off to the thought of religious people getting fined.

Now, before anyone gets butthurt and hysterical, I support gay marriage.​

It about not break the law but refusing service for subjective views not objective facts.

 

[Flankerl]

Some people are dumb. If you don't want to bake the cake just say that you can't make it in time.