[b][color:#3333FF]Link...![/color][/b]

The owners of a mom and pop bakery have just learned there is a significant price to pay for following their religious beliefs.

Aaron and Melissa Klein, the owners of Sweet Cakes By Melissa, have been ordered to pay $135,000 in damages to a lesbian couple after they refused to bake them a wedding cake in 2013.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI) awarded $60,000 to Laurel Bowman-Cryer and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer for “emotional suffering.”

“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage,” the final order read. “It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.”

According to the BOLI, the lesbian couple suffered great angst. One of the women “felt depressed and questioned whether there was something inherently wrong with the sexual orientation she was born with.” They said she had “difficulty controlling her emotions and cried a lot.”

The other woman “experienced extreme anger, outrage, embarrassment, exhaustion, frustration, intense sorrow and shame” simply because the Kleins refused to provide them with a wedding cake.

Jeez. That must have been one heck of a cake.

It sounds as if the state of Oregon is sending a stern warning to Christian business owners like the Kleins.

“Within Oregon’s public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society,” the ruling states. “The ability to enter public places, to shop and dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry.”

Does The Bureau of Labor and Industry truly believe that Christians who want to follow the teachings of their faith are bigots?

It certainly seems to me the only entity guilty of unfettered bigotry is the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry.

Since the day they turned away the lesbian couple’s business, the Kleins have suffered greatly. Their business was subjected to boycotts and pickets. LGBT activists and their supporters threatened any wedding vendor that did business with Sweet Cakes By Melissa.

Mrs. Klein told me her five children were subjected to death threats -- death threats for simply refusing to participate in a same-sex wedding. That doesn’t sound very tolerant to me.

Eventually, the bullying became so severe the family had to shut down their retail store and Mr. Klein had to take a job picking up garbage. Today, Mrs. Klein continues to make cakes in her home.

“We were just running our business the best we could – following the Lord’s example,” she said. “I’m just blown away by the ruling. They are punishing us for not participating in the wedding.”

Mr. Klein said he plans on appealing the ruling and had harsh words for BOLI Commissioner Brad Avakian.

“This man has no power over me,” Klein said. “He seems to think he can tell me to be quiet. That doesn’t sit well with me and I refuse to comply.”

Mr. Klein accused the BOLI of ordering him to not speak publicly about the case – an order he said is unconstitutional.

“When my constitutional freedoms have been violated by the state I’m going to speak out,” he said. “That’s the way it is.”

Regardless, the Klein case has demonstrated once again that gay rights trump religious liberty. Other Christian business owners should pay close attention.

The Kleins had a choice. They could obey the government or they could obey God. They chose God – and now they must pay the price.

This is exactly where the whole consternation is going to spiral out of control and create utter chaos.

So if an atheist baker declines to bake me a Christian Flag cake do I have equal entitlements as outlined in the case that DW put up??

I really believe the definitions of discrimination rights against will have to be rewritten. Not a great start. In fact, it sucks...

Thank you SC!! You still have a lot more decisions to screw up!

Beginning of the end!!

The second woman mentioned gets on top.

I keep suggesting the lesbian bitches take their cake order to a muslim bakery

If people don't want to abide by the rules of the land, get out of business. They have a public business and operate in an environment that doesn't allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. If they don't like it, they need to change the business or do something else.

We are not talking about churches being forced to do gay weddings or hire gay ministers. As much as I think the gay marriage thing is wrong, I don't think a for profit business can exclude gays just because they are gay. Adultery and homosexuality are the same sin. Are they also excluding adulterers from their cakes?

Kodiak has it right.

I keep hearing about "obeying God"....Where in the Bible does it say to not bake a cake for gay people?

It all seems pretty silly to me. If I'm sellin' cakes and somebody wants to buy one, I'm selling it.

On the other hand, I don't think the government should force private businesses to serve anyone that they choose not to serve.

Queers and minorities always suffer most,
all things being equal.

Good luck collecting!
I'd burn my house down before they'd get one red cent!

From now on, make the cake and mix up salt and sugar.

According to the Bible you are supposed to stone them. Since it was a Colorado baker, I guess he could of included some of our finest, newest, agricultural product in the batter and stoned the entire wedding party.

I don't think they are Jewish but it might have made for a good wedding.

Now that's funny right there!! Literal interpretation right??

A little bit sacrilegious but okay...

So right in the lawsuit they admit that the lesbians are mentally ill. Who'd a guessed it?

The entire chapter is good reading, but here's the meat:






Is that enough for you?

You going to apply that to all sin or just the gay?
Business might suck if you have to exclude sinners.

I wonder how those same Christian bakers deal with Mathew 5:27-32.

Well if you have to bake that gay wedding cake, and if Amazon is going to quit selling the Confederate Flag, then maybe they ought to stop selling these too.

If you absolutely force me to bake a Gay wedding cake, I will. But with all the rats around and getting into everything like they do, your cake might have slightly more than the 1prt/Million rat turd in it....

Barry-Romans has nothing to do with a Christian doing business, John has nothing to do with homosexuality and Ephesians has nothing to do with baking a cake (providing a business service).

So, no.

So, would it be okay to refuse to bake a cake with a Confederate flag on it?

Would it be okay for a black bakery to refuse to bake a cake with a Confederate flag on it?

Time for you Oregonians to do some creative shopping!

Yes. My Dad had that discussion and he was right. I even argued that the battle flag could be religion.

That's why I said earlier that discrimination against (fill in the blank) would be next.

Christian flag they would have to make or face the same scrutiny as other defined discrimination's.

In Oregon gay people are a protected class. People who love the confederate flag aren't.

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

Persecution of Christians is once again in vogue. History repeats itself.

I think that forcing someone to interact with you, when they have no wish to do so, is called harassment.

Say no with your price.

Make a [bleep] cake, so they tell their friends not to hire you.

Botch the schedule.

Drop the cake leaving the car.

Get the names on the cake wrong.

Plenty of ways to make life unpleasant for a gay.

The bakers sound like hypocrites to me who got what they deserved. God doesn't rate sins on a scale of 1-10, all are equal. If they didn't want to bake a cake for gays, they shouldn't bake a cake for non-gay fornicators. If they had a rule that they wouldn't serve sinners they wouldn't be in business long. Sex before marriage is a sin in Gods eye, but these people decided it was their place to judge one sin and not the other.

Goooooooo Christians!!!!!

Depends.

Adulterers generally don't sue, for reasons only known to the guilt ridden.

Gotta love government sponsored blackmail.....

So people should be forced by the government to do business with people that they don't want to do business with?

This guy probably wants served a can of tuna at Denny's at midnight, and the world is full of bigots who won't serve this perfectly normal individual and will treat him differently as a business....

The government did not force them to open a public, for profit business. If you decide to open a public, for profit business, there are hundreds of laws you are required to adhere to. Whether you agree with it or not, you know that going into it. It was their choice to break one of those rules and now they want to bitch about the consequences.

And you're okay with that?

They got fined for breaking a law they knew existed. It was their choice. It doesn't matter what I think the law should be.

Preach it brother!

Sue all gun companies and put them out of business, is that what I'm hearing?

Seems I've heard this victim consumer rationale before....

Don't know about him but I'm certainly not. Once again though the focus is in the wrong place. Its not the gays causing trouble nearly as much as it is government. If it wasn't for the government intruding into what should be private affairs, none of this would be an issue. Instead of placing the blame where it belongs, people tend to focus on the gays.

Are gun companies refusing to sell to gays now?

There's a law that says homos must be sold cake?

it is truly a sad day when one cannot discriminate at will...

Unfortunately yes there is if your business sells cakes to the public.

I see it as a direct assault on everyone's individual freedom of choice. If a woman can legally kill an unborn child, then I ought to be able to say no to baking a damn cake, to anybody that I choose. miles

You should be able to, but you can't. Don't open a cake business if you can't play by those rules unless you're willing to pay the fines.

They are pretty damn wary of manufactured victims, to the point.

Guess you missed that.

And most particularly when exercised with one's own toil...

Thought we were talking about Christians refusing to do business with gays.

When your working for yourself, pricing by the job, and there is a job you don't want, make the price high enough they go elsewhere.

There is usually a simple solution to things like this, if one just takes a moment and thinks about it.

No, we were talking about laws manufactured as weapons, but whatever it takes to get businesses in court....

Luke 21:10 Then he said to them: "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
11 There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.
12 "But before all this, they will lay hands on you and persecute you. They will deliver you to synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name.

A lot worse is to come. Before it's over, true Christians will be underground but the Lord will be with them. They will be cared for in ways we can't even imagine now.

How is this persecution?

Sorry man, but that's gotta be the dumbest thing you've written in a long time. Liberals can kill babies but a baker can't deny a liberal a cake w/o facing financial ruin and you don't see the persecution?

The separation of church and state seems to be only a one way street where the church is shackled but not the state.

That is the way it feels anyway.

I don't see it as persecution. I see it as a misguided effort of a Christian baker to apply his faith to his business. God doesn't make one sin worse than another, but the baker has. I might have more sympathy if he was also refusing adulterers since it is the same sin.

I absolutely don't agree with gay marriage and think homosexuality is a sin. It is no worse than adultery though, and church would be pretty empty if we got rid of adulterers. We are not talking about the government telling church or religion what we have to think. We are talking about public businesses complying with the law of the land. I guess you'd be happier with Jim Crow laws? Or maybe it'd be OK if business were allowed to refuse service to Christians?

I am about 90% with you on this, maybe a little more.

I'd have no issue not doing business with someone who refused service to Christians or say gun owners. There are plenty of business out there who serve Christians and are happy to have my business.

If I was gay and there was a company that did not want to serve gays, I would not want my money supporting them.

But hey, we have 94 million Americans not working and the lowest labor participation rate since 1977 so all of these regulations are obviously having no affect on the economy.

Would it be proper for the court to award this guy 135 thousand dollars because the clerk wouldn't sell him a Bic lighter?

This ain't rocket surgery, when you get work that you are not interested in you price it accordingly.

Then, if they accept, have a scheduling conflict.

The public didn't start and doesn't own my business, I DID and I DO.

The public doesn't do everything, and I won't make you a list, that I do, nor does the public pay my bills, or my taxes. I DO.

It is MY business, I should be able to refuse to serve any damn person, for any damn reason, that I WANT TO!

Do you get that? This is not a public entity, it is MINE.

This is only about spoiled children getting their way at someone, everyone else's expense. Liberals scream for recognition, but I do not have to validate stupidity, nor should I have to serve everyone with MY BUSINESS.

If you think a business is public, stop paying taxes and see who they come after, the owner, or the public.

How many adulterers do you know that celebrate their adultery by ordering a cake? And if a business refused to provide me a service, the last thing I would think to do would be to take them to court. I would simply go to the next business. In fact, I do that even if they do serve me, and the service sucks.

The whole idea of "protected classes" reinforces that those people are indeed inferior. I can manage to get a wedding cake, or any other product, without requiring government assistance. Why are the gays, blacks, etc. so incapable?

As a business I understand your point. I am still working this out in my mind.

Quite a few actually. By the Bibles definition, lots of marriages are adultery. We tend to ignore those though as they seem less sickening than gay weddings.

By those same thoughts, do what you want and see how long you get away with it. You'll see pretty quick that it's not as much your business as you think it is. Just because something should be a certain way doesn't mean it is.

Amen. Oh wait, can I say that?

Mike

and Jesus said," Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

And Caeser said "thou shall bake cake for the masses, whomever they are."

There's only two options to consider.

A: free

B: not free

We ain't talkin' nuclear physics here.

Of course "reasonable people" would expect reasonable resistance to a Christian baker making a cake for a gay "wedding", but to expect the opposite and the law to follow is a bit much.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell.

Of course if I owed the clerk of court 2k in unpaid fines I would expect either jail time or garnishment, I would also expect and get immediate action, yet if same said "law" had a guy bounce a 2k check on my business, don't expect any reasonable amount of recourse as a business owner, if any, without luck and a judge with a brain.

The "law" as manufactured is a horseschit matter and anyone claiming it just or equal really needs to own a business or get a clue....

Yeah, I don't get upset if someone doesn't want my business. I'll just go down the road to the next guy who does. I think both parties are equally at fault as the gay people weren't harmed. They could have got a cake at many other places.But you know good and well that over half the posters here would be calling, emailing, and threatening a boycott if the same baker refused service to military members. Many of the same people who say it's the businesses right to refuse service would be the same people trying to burn it down if they refused military members.

The guy who makes the no shoes no shirt no service sign is gonna be pissed.

Public business, private business, whatever. It is THEIR business and they can run it however they want. The cake makers are in their pursuit of happiness, whether anybody agrees with it or not and so are the lesbians. Life's better (to me) when you're nice to other people but who says you have to be?

I understand Bluedreaux's point about it being against the law, but that law is tyrannical. Period.

Bristoe said it best: People are either free or they're not.

I don't discriminate, but anybody can and it's not my job to approve or disapprove.

But that's not how it works in Oregon. You can't refuse service to someone because they're a homosexual.

Those are the same laws that allow a Christian to use a degree in theology to apply for a job that requires an advanced degree and the same laws that give employees protections that allow them to use employer-sponsored tuition reimbursement programs to get a degree in theology.

The laws are there, and they benefit more than just gay people.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.318

It won't matter. Being shoe-less doesn't make you a member of a protected class, so the customer would have no grounds for complaint.




THIS WHOLE CASE HINGES ON THE FACT THAT IN OREGON GAY PEOPLE ARE A PART OF A PROTECTED CLASS.

(Caps-lock not intended for you HW, just for the crowd.)

I'm curious about the view of the Christians here....

In a world that I constantly hear is getting worse and worse....In a country that I constantly hear is spiraling out of control....In a country where Christians are the minority and where "persecution" is getting worse and worse....

Why would any Christian want to live in a world where service can be refused to anyone for any reason? Because if that's the case, I can see a world where my grandkids won't be able to buy anything (assuming the world is continuing to get worse as everyone seems to think).

I prefer to live in a world where everyone is free to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Is there a generation that didn't think the world was going to hell? Christians living in the US today have it pretty dang good. We have no idea what persecution really is. Imagine being a Christian in the middle east and many parts of Africa. We are free to assemble and preach/teach what we believe. I can have a Bible at work without being fired. We are not even close to bad yet.

I've never found the concept of freedom hard to understand,...but be damned if some people don't need a lot of explainin' before they can figure it out.

Free = nobody can force you to do what you don't want to do.

Not free = people can force you to do what you don't want to do.

That's as simple as I can make it.

I like free.

This! Defining businesses as places of "public accommodation" for purposes of govt regulation and social engineering was an unconstitutional taking, IMO.

Bristoe
I've lived and traveled the world and I've got to ask, where is this freedom you preach about so much? I've yet to find any place that a man is truly free. Point me in the right direction and I might make it there one day. I'd love to live free of anyone and anything, just haven't seen it yet.

So what's your point?

There is no way I will believe the gay couple did not purposely seek out this baker and go for the bucks. It was a setup from the start.

My point is you say it's simple, you're either free or you're not. I've never seen real freedom and wonder where it is.

It will be right here when people like you stop fighting against it.

This is the only world we've got right now.

I'm sure they either purposefully went there or pushed the issue after they were told no. Either way they were partly at fault as I doubt this was the only cake maker around. The baker shared equally in that fault though. He could have taken many other approaches and maybe even got in some meaningful teachings of Christ in the process if that was really what he was worried about.

This isn't Oregon.... This is Potlandia, and them running the entire state with their BS....once again, people outside of Multnomah, Marion and Lane Counties need to start getting to the voting booths a lot more often in higher numbers than they do...

elections matter...

Living near where this happened I can assure you there is at least one more bakery around.

And, I agree with you.

I was a stupidviser in a fairly large manufacturing company. I hired and fired for several departments. All races, all genders and those who were gender confused. In that kind of situation there is no room for any kind of discrimination.

Yeah, I guess I've been too busy pursuing life, liberty, and happiness instead of being miserable because I don't live in Utopia. Someday perhaps.

hmmmm,...you must not own a cake shop.

you can refuse service to anyone.... you just have to pick your reasons for doing so very very carefully....to make sure it can't be considered discriminatory...

why?

KodiakIsland: Right is right and yadda yadda. Do you believe the current state of this country is what the men who created it meant when they wrote the documents that defined it?

You comment on Bristoe's utopia, how far is his vision do you think from those of say... Jefferson?

Or: How far is Bristoe's version of common sense from Thomas Paine's?

I wish more people would ask themselves what it really means to be an American.

Were people in this country ever free or did they just trade one government for another. The ideal the founders had in mind never came to fruition and it's been continually perverted ever since.

My success and happiness comes from playing by the rules I'm given, changing what I can and accepting what I can't. If I'm not willing to abide by the rules, I don't play the game. I can be bitter over what should be, or I can be happy with what is.

No I don't. I'm not willing to abide by the rules so I don't make cakes. Not for the public anyway.

If you were the judge, would you make the cake shop give the dykes $135,000 for not baking them a cake?

Don't dodge here and there with the answer. Just a simple yes or no.

Where in the constitution does it say a business must produce anything that its owners don't want to?

If I was the judge and the law said that's what the fine was for not making a butch cake, then yes I would fine them that. A judge is supposed to rule by the law. It wouldn't mean I agreed with it, but I would be bound to enforce it.

Argument over. Thank you.

It doesn't.

Duh.

It's not a fine, it's a judgment for damages in a civil case.

And your argument speaks to a "reasonable Man" standard... how is 135,000 dollars a reasonable standard for making up for a cake they refused to bake in plenty of time for them to choose another bakery?

I have absolutely no beef with lesbians being treated reasonably, but I have seen far, far worse offenders in court being punished with far, far less. Even in situations where lives were put in serious jeopardy the consequences were a fraction of 135,000 dollars.

A friend had an employee steal 50k and the court-mandated restitution was less than 5k!

The judge needs to realize this was a publicity stunt from the get-go and that the bakery was being set up.

Unless of course the judge was a peter puffer in which case they should have abstained from taking the case.

And I could not possibly care less about anyone's sexual peccadilloes as long as they are not waved in my face.

Not everybody is willing to allow others to define the parameters of their lives. Enjoy your existence, it may or may not be the only one you get.

You can answer your original question the same way. At least the constitution is relevant. Or should be.

There's nothing about sexual orientation in the Constitution either but we certainly have a plethora of laws and rulings concerning it.

I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't answer to someone about something. YMMV
And I am enjoying life as I'm pretty sure it will be the only one I get.

ICGAF

The bakery had baked a cake for one of the mother of one of the brides a few years earlier. It was a word of mouth recommendation.

Page 5.... http://media.oregonlive.com/business_impact/other/BOLI-sweetcakes.pdf

Well hell, that shows you how much of a [bleep] I give about this. I thought it was a fine in criminal court. In that case I'd have found them guilty, fined them $5 plus court cost and told them all to get the hell out of my court. Like I give a [bleep] about lesbian cake.

It isn't reasonable to bankrupt a baker over refusing service. It does make an example of them, and some in power are apt to do that.

"Power is not a means, it is an end..."
-George Orwell

I have no issue with requiring them to bake a cake. The court should have required them to use flour acquired from “homo” plants reproduction. I imagine those empty husks (chaff) would make quite the cake, huh?

Quit using the word "gay'. It's "homosexual"! Gay is a word the queers invented to make themselves seem less harmful to the rest of the world.

They wish to be free to live their way, while placing others in bondage to them.

Satan is very crafty. Just ask Eve when you see her.

If you think things are bad now, what will you be thinking during the Rapture? You will be required to take the Mark of the Beast, and those that refuse, will be decapitated immediately.

Sound familiar?

Who in their right mind would think that they were 'damaged' $135k? This was punishment, not damages.

I don't think one sin is worse than the other, but the Baker doesn't knows who the Adulterers, Murderers, Thieves, etc. are, he simply makes cakes.

Forcing him to bake a cake makes him complicit in the whole gay ceremony, something that he Does Not want to be a part of.

A person should not be forced to do something against their will that violates the core of their religious beliefs. You will never get me to believe otherwise, no matter the argument.

It's the only thing we have left in this world that people can't take away from you, and now the Gov't is trying their best to steal that as well.

I don't have any personal experience with "damages" restitution.
My buddy was waiting for his truck to be loaded at a dock when a runaway forklift hit his truck. He was messed up for months and had countless doctor and chiropractor visits before returning to work. He's doubting he'll see much of anything for "damages". Even though the forklift operator jumped off the forklift and left it parked with no brake applied, and the entire thing was caught on security tapes.

Same trucker backed up 3' to make a tight turn in an intersection in Atlanta and bumped a car, at about 2 mph. Two black parasites crawl out screaming, "My neck, my neck!" and end up with $13,000 cash for their trouble.

That all seems fair. Just like $135,000 for the poor mistreated gays. It would have been cheaper for the baker to hire a hit man to take them out. This is nothing more than a setup, and if left to continue, will be one of the factors in the demise of our country.

Bristoe has it right, free or not. Pretty damn simple.

They should open a new bakery and just sell fruitcakes. Everyone would be happy.

If the bakers made them feel bad for not making them a cake. You can not imagine how bad thy would feel after I got thru telling them what I thought about them and their kind. Hasbeen

I see this sentiment commonly expressed.

But it's just not true.

https://carm.org/questions-sins-equal

Yeah pretty familiar, sounded just as stupid all the other times too.

.Gov is forcing a person to violate their religious beliefs in order to stay in business. Being in business goes to the core of our liberties protected by the Constitution. Forcing a Christian or muslim to participate in an event that violates their religious beliefs under penalty of law isn't constitutional. The free exercise of religion obviously includes choosing to not participate in events you find religiously objectionable. It is no different than a Christian couple suing to force an Orthodox Jewish caterer to make pork tenderloin with oyster dressing. Not all Jewish caterers hold this belief, yet no one would ever consider doing that. How is forcing a fundamentalist Christian to participate in a a gay wedding any different from forcing an ordained minister with the same beliefs to officiate one?

The actions of the baker are not discriminatory because it is the EVENT they can't support. They didn't deny service to the couple because they were gay. In fact, they were more than willing to sell them anything they baked , except for the one thing which would violate their religious beliefs. You want a birthday cake? No problem. It's a selective denial of service.

Very well said, Wycolocowboy.

And let me throw this out there - the civil ceremony is no different than a religious ceremony because the state, having established a set of morals and usurped many of the roles & functions of churches, has defacto established a state religion.

Yep. Sure seems so.

But if a business advertises cakes for sale, then sell cakes, not a religious agenda. They were not being forced to actually participate in the so called wedding ceremony. Now if the customer was being full out nutso, while ordering a cake in the bakery, then the owner has the right, I think, to kick them out. I guess though, nutso didn't happen in the bakery.

From my somewhat limited observation, lesbians always have angst. That kinda happens when narcissists don't get the attention, that they think they deserve. The nature of the beast...

I agree with everything you've said.

But, as a business owner, who wants to stay in business, you must understand the business environment you are dealing in....especially in today's f'd up PC world.

Bottom line, whether they suck a johnson, or munch a carpet, their money is a green as anyone else's.

Sometimes you have to just hold your nose and take their cake like anyone else's in order to stay in business.

Not saying it's right or wrong, just the environment we currently live in.

Tony

Actually, no. This baker didn't refuse to do business with gay people. They were more than happy to sell them any products they made - except the one product that violated their religious beliefs because it required they provide material or direct support for a gay wedding. The Constitution doesn't say "Congress shall make no law abridging the free exercise of religion (unless you open a business)".

If I am a private practice anesthesiologist, can .Gov force me to participate in an abortion? The common sense response would be to ask, "Why would someone would seek out a Christian anesthesiologist to participate in an abortion?" Answer - because they were targeted for their religious beliefs. So why would someone seek out a fundamentalist Christian baker to participate materially in their gay wedding? Answer - because they are being targeted for government-sponsored persecution for their religious beliefs.

So why did the Pilgrims leave England to come to the New World? To flee religious persecution and the English government targeting them specifically because of their religious beliefs.

So basically, the bakers played right into the liberals hands.

I don't think God gives a chit if you feed cake to Lesbians and make them Fat.

Exactly....

Very good points. But then should one assume that this baker was actually targeted, from day one, for her religious beliefs? Don't know. I can't make that assumption. I do believe that Christian belief, originally as being an integral part of the American way, is being targeted today. And we are now, not a homogenous society. We are not even a society. The breakdown of the family as the original society, and the creation of narcissist children, now being the norm, is a big problem. No society, then anarchy.
Narcissists crave power. because power can control people. And power then increases narcisisstic behavior. Gays get power, want more power, not just to legitimize their behavior, but to control others. This is just the tip of the iceberg. We're not just talking gays here.

The baker was targeted. And they were persecuted to the fullest extent as the owners were sued both professionally and personally. The baker in Colorado was also targeted. That's without dispute. They went to the bakery with foreknowledge of their religious beliefs with the intent to sue when the specific service was denied. The Colorado baker chose to close their business rather than violate their beliefs.

The judge who is handling the Oregon case just handed out a gag order against the baker.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...gag-order-against-opposing-gay-marriage/

That judge should be hung with a copy of the constitution shoved up his a$$ . I'm really fed up with this fascist BS of redefining our constitutional rights.

I don't think the founding fathers were all that keen on religions other than christianity having equal protection. This is a country founded on christian beliefs. If you demand equal protection for all religions in the US, be careful what you ask for. We're being overrun with muslims, do you really want equality or do you want a country "UNDER (the christian) GOD"? Wait till the muslims demand equal representation on our courts benches, schools, etc.

There's all this court precedence and hand wringing over equality in every sphere, but I think the fight for equality is more the root of the problem than the solution to anything.

Here's a fact- Not everyone is equal. That won't be obvious to everyone because, guess what, some can't be objective. Which proves the point perfectly. The slacker is not the equal the scholar. The tramp the equal of the clergyman. The cull the equal the statesman.

The men that founded the country were EXCEPTIONAL men. They paid a large price for their vision for this country. Of the many other men in the proximity, who were less exceptional, these men stood out and got it done. They were not equal.

The confusion is because they sought equality in some ways, as in protection to live out your life free of govt harassment and abuse by your fellow man. They never said that all men were equal in honor, integrity, legitimacy.

The modern argument is to give all the illegitimate bastards legitimacy through "equal protection". That was never the intent, IMO. Immoral, stupid, illegitimate will always be just that, no matter what the crazies want you to think it is. Sure, protect everyone from harm, but not baking a cake for you isn't harming you. The entire premise is more than ridiculous, it's insulting to any thinking man. But, gays are now "equal", so we must validate their cries of abuse, at all cost to normal and healthy society.

There's no way in hell we want equality. What we want is the God of the Bible, rule of law under that God, and sanity in our society. If you want "equality", you better think real hard what that's going to look like. Not everyone is equal, nor should they be treated as such.

How can a judge hand out a gag order post fine.?

They'd have to put me in jail I guess...

They'd be glad to oblige. That's always been the end game.

Link..![/color][/b]


Not content with trampling freedom of religion, Oregon authorities have now turned to freedom of speech, issuing a gag order to the Christian owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa forbidding them from speaking or writing about their Christian beliefs regarding same-sex marriage.

On Thursday, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian upheld a preliminary finding that sentenced Aaron and Melissa Klein, the Christian bakers who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, to a fine of $135,000 in emotional damages to the homosexual couple they denied service, but also added a new provision forbidding them to speak about their unwillingness to serve a gay marriage.

[b][color:#FF0000]The couple had accused the Kleins of “mental rape,” adding that they had suffered a “loss of appetite” and “impaired digestion,” which remarkably led to “weight gain.”

Twisting the actual facts of the case, Avakian declared that the bakers had refused the couple service because they were lesbians, which is demonstrably false, since they happily served other homosexuals who were not seeking a gay wedding cake.

“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage,” Avakian wrote. “It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.”

The Oregon official imposed a gag order on the couple, mandating that they “cease and desist” from speaking publicly about not wanting to bake cakes for same-sex weddings based on their Christian beliefs.

“The Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries hereby orders [Aaron and Melissa Klein] to cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation,” Avakian wrote.

The gag order was issued after the Kleins participated in an interview with Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. During the interview, Aaron said among other things, “This fight is not over. We will continue to stand strong.”

Indeed, the couple is not rolling over and playing dead.

“This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” wrote the Kleins on their Facebook page. “According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech.”

The Kleins’ attorney Anna Harmon called the judgment a “shocking result which shows the state’s relentless campaign to punish Oregonians who live and work according to their faith.”

The Kleins have already been victims of harassment, including having the Sweet Cakes by Melissa car vandalized and broken into twice, and having photographers and florists sever ties with the company. This forced the couple to close the bakery in September 2013, eventually relocating to the couple’s home in Sandy.

They were just sending a message, don't resist or we will bankrupt you in the courts

Well that changed my mind about the intent. After looking at the judgement I have several thoughts. First, under Oregon law the baker is clearly guilty but I did not doubt that in the beginning. Second, There was more involved than baking and delivering the cake. The baker set up and participated in the wedding thereby becoming part of a ceremony that his faith clearly states is against God's will. Thirdly, the State is demanding that someone in business must put aside their faith or face consequences. Where the did the freedom go to peacefully practice your freedom of religion. Lastly, I am dead set against discrimination and I can see where the brides were discriminated against. I do not think the punishment fit the crime in that the fines seem to be to be way more than the offence.

With the new SC ruling it is something most religions will have to start dealing with. State will now be saying what church can or cannot be forced to accept.

If you are forced under threat of law/fine/prison to associate and do business with people against your will are you really "free"???

The other shoe dropping is the pederast asking a baker to make a cake celebrating his adolescent/pre-pubescent "boyfriend". That's coming, because we all know that "they" are never satisfied with their on-going destruction of traditional Western Civilization standards and values.

Don't know if this has been mentioned,but,the lesbian couple could start their own catering/baking business directed at/for gay "marriage."

This one wasn't. But you'd have to actually research the case to know that.

The church will go underground. Look at China. The social clubs will stay where they are because they are no threat.

Speaking of going underground to avoid persecution, how's Mark?

Lot and his family were spared the destruction that was to come.

Yes it will but the time is not near close enough at this point.

If I went into a Christian bookstore and tried to special order a book on Satanism would they have to sell it to me?

If I went into a New Age Witchcraft book store (they are out there) and asked them to special order an anti-witchcraft text for me would they have to sell it to me?

And assume both have a history of special-ordering books...

Which would be most likely to get sued?

Try it, you might become $135k richer....

Those issues are protected under OR law. The homosexual issue is not.

If any one would do what Bluedreau alluded to and research the case you would readily see that NO gag order has been issued. The bakery couple says that they FEEL like they're under a gag order because talking about the case on some media outlet was in part, what lead to the judgement. They went on the radio and expounded on their reasons for denying service and what they said was used against them. They said they now FEEL they can't discuss it.

John

Everyone is free to do as they please, but there are consequences.

Why do we argue about these local laws?

It is the Law Of God that we need to be concerned with.

Do we not remember what happened to cities of Sodom, and Gomorrah, and the cities of the south?

Romans 13:1-5

1 Obey the government, for God is the one who put it there. All governments have been placed in power by God.
2 So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow.
3 For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong. So do what they say, and you will get along well.
4 The authorities are sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for you will be punished. The authorities are established by God for that very purpose, to punish those who do wrong.
5 So you must obey the government for two reasons: to keep from being punished and to keep a clear conscience.

Thanks for posting that.

It's not a gag order and it does NOTHING to prevent them from sharing their faith.

It simply says that the Sweetcakes people can't keep saying "My business won't serve gay people".....BECAUSE THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW.

I have to wonder if Paul actually wrote that, or if it was added in by some later government bureaucrat.

Always glad to post the truth, even if I missed it the first time...

This whole mess still rubs me the wrong way. Someone set up a GoFundMe account to help pay with the verdict, but GoFundMe cancelled the account, essentially citing the Kleins are Lawbreakers, and GoFundMe won't be used to support unlawful activity, or some such drivel.

This is as far as I've read, and don't intend to read further.

This is whats wrong today. Being told who you have to serve and what you have to serve them.

Its YOUR business, you should be able to say no shirt, no shoes no service and expand that.

And if an idiot finds you don't want to bake them a confederate flag cake, and you are dumb enough to continue to push, rather than go to the confederate bakery down the street you are the whole problem in a nutshell.

I used to refuse to mount things for folks all the time in my taxidermy business for various reasons. I never had an issue and if i'd have been sued for it, I would have closed my doors that day, and I've have never shown up in court either.

Might would have started the revolution early that way and that might not have been a bad thing either...

antelope_sniper,

Do you ever wonder about Plato's writings? Your world view is clouding your intelligence. What you wonder has absolutely no bearing on the facts of history.

America is being detatched from its moral anchors, one thread at a time....

Of course I've wondered about Plato's writings. Let's go back a generation further. Some have wondered if Socrates actually existed, since we have no texts directly ascribed to him, or was he primarily a literary creation of Plato.

The difference between Plato writing about Socrates and Paul writing about the various incarnation of God, is one is claiming divine authority, and the other is proposing ideas to stand and fall on their own merit.

So the late bureaucrat would have more to gain by manipulating the texts ascribed to Paul then Plato.

It's official,...freedom is against the law. (of course, it's been that way for quite some time)

That right there is what will cause a major SHTF movement.

OTOH if I was Pro-minded whatever wouldn't I support a like-minded business? Of course not. They want the cake, money and more importantly the press!!

This is ALL bad business and will create scam torts up the azzz..No pun intended.

(Your verses seem eerily like something I might find in the NIV, which I do not ascribe to. They are certainly not from the King James Version).

These verses in Romans describes our conduct concerning the local law which is "orderly", not which is immoral or ungodly. If immoral or anti-christian, it is one's duty to obey God rather than men.

Opinions given in the Scofield Study Bible.

Isn't it though. And a darn fine effort to boot.

Everything came together to form the "perfect storm" in 2008. I don't give the Lefty knuckleheads all the credit, it seems that there's more to the U.S. sudden implosion...

Sudden???

This has been in the making since 1912.

[/i]my wife had a buddha head in her shop, thought it was a cute decoration.


she got a letter from a lady "offended" for her displaying an idol of a graven image


thank God she was Christian, they'd have laughed her out of the courtroom, so NO we didn't get sued.


we wrote her a letter, nice one btw, that the bust seemed to suit the decor of the room it was place in and sorry if it offended her but that was not our intent.

I'm gonna ask momma if she'd like to hang the stars and bars in one of the treatment rooms!


135K????


they think they were anguished??? lmao, can I sue politicians for the anguish they cause me? [i]

antelope_sniper,



The problem with your desired theory is Apostle Paul's letters were immediately copied and sent out to other churches. One would have to be in charge of the original manuscript to accomplish what you want.

Since when does a state law trump the US Constitution?

In Oregon, they couldn't find a baker willing to bake a cake for a gay wedding? Or even a gay baker? On the left coast? IMO, these people were targeted and set up.

The jerk from the state that assessed the fine is known to attend gay functions and did donate to a gay organization in Portland.

I wonder when someone's going to ask a gay baker to cater their support traditional marriage rally.

Bb

No. They. Weren't.

Targeted or not, some laws should not be supported or enforced and shoudl have never been allowed on the books.

Was a better world before all this we all have to be even bullchit started.

I know, I"m somewhat in the enforcement business too and I see quite a bit of rules come down the pike that i have to enforce but totally disagree with.

My pat answer about dumb laws, is that I would not live in a town that had laws like ours, as I'd get in a fight with myself over enforcing them and I"d tell myself to GFmyself...Thats why I at least dont live in a city of any size and never intend to if I can help it.

It's frankly no skin off my nose if gays wed each other. I don't care what they do. I just want them to quit rubbing it in our faces and STFU about it.

We don't have any of the originals, or the copies of the originals, or the copies of the copies. The earliest fragments we have from Romans are dated to around 200 AD, and Romans 13.1-5 is not in that manuscript.

There are days I wish I could prove your suspicions were right.

Governments were not a plan of God. The Hebrews, while in the wilderness, demanded laws to live by. God reluctantly allowed it, eventually delivering the Ten Commandments, to Moses, on the mount.

Obviously, that only applies when the govt is in harmony with divine law. Otherwise, trying to overthrow Hitler would have been a sin.

Interesting how that passage stands out from the rest of the Bible. The entire Bible, from the tower of Babylon to the crowning of Saul, to Jesus' criticism of the rulers of Jerusalem and his pointing out the hypocrisy of rendering unto Caesar, is a warning against replacing God with government.

I only threw it out to stir the pot. I agree wit you but you are spoiling all my fun.

You toss em. I hit em.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"

Jesus, for people with hard on about the "law", I can't understand how they have such difficulty following it, or getting all jacked up about enforcing faux law when real Constitutional issues like the border and invasion are ignored in the same breath.

Many states had no issue amending their Constitutions to define marriage (like they are supposed to), yet the Federal government can't follow its own rules and doesn't want to. Where is the Federal Amendment then? Where is the representative government?

Too many "free" people want to be ruled by a court or an elected jester; our government doesn't work that way, which is why its not working and why everyone who actually believes in the process is now a freedom hating bigot.....

All three Federal government branches are one big team that has been hell bent on circumventing the 10th Amendment and enough people seem to think that's the way it works, which is why its broke.

Can't agree with your version Scott.. Try this:


Romans 13:1-5King James Version (KJV)

13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

GeoW,



That may have been crystal clear in 1611, but It does not communicate what the "higher power" is in the twenty-first century. AA uses "higher power" for its participants. They are encouraged to use anything they want as a "higher power".

So we re-translate the Word to fit our pleasure?

GeoW,



You can't be serious! The guys who translated the Bible in 1611 used the best manuscripts available and the best language of the day. Today, if we want the best information for the readers, we use the best manuscripts available and the best language of our day to communicate to the readers. The Bible is not re-translated over and over. Each group gets the best manuscripts they can to keep their version as close to the original language as possible.

The idea of using a 1611 Book and using 1611 dictionaries and commentaries for us to use a Book meant for the masses is ridiculous.

I was thirty years old when I became a Christian. I did the above and worked hard at studies. Then I discovered the New American Standard Bible and later the New King James Bible. I was delighted at the ease with which I could study God's Word.

The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Explain to me what part of the firs amendment did not get violated with the application of state law in this case? Clearly the judge put state law ahead of the constitution in this case?. I'm not religious or anti gay marriage, but this clearly a violation of our basic freedoms and liberties afforded in the constitution. The erosion of those freedoms makes me want to get off the porch.

Governments....Bibles....Times....Definitions?

Now then, let's jump forward to the present day, and discuss this One World Government thing, you know, that thing that is knocking at our door, and the anti-christ that will be it's leader.

Governments? Really?

Are we to be in praise of our Governments? And are we to praise the laws brought forth?

If we are to follow the direction of our governments, then will we all be obliged to take the Mark of the Beast?

When Jesus was found to have broken no laws, but was found guilty anyway, and sentenced to death by crucifixion, and died, and entombed, and arisen from the dead, and walked among the population for forty days, and ascended into heaven, he then sent to us the helper. The Holy Spirit. To lead and to guide us.

Since our country has deviated from the path of righteousness, and developed sinful ways, the Holy Spirit began to be "taken out of the way", no longer co-mingling with us, and our state of decay and destruction had begun.

There would be only one way to bring the Holy Spirit back into the fold, if this were even possible.

God is always with us.

Hmmm...

He said He would NEVER leave us, or forsake us.

Well, this thread got weird.

Sooner or Later than usual.?

Bluedreaux,

Are you a LEO?

Nah, he mentioned one time he's a Sagittarius...

Oh but I am serious. What you said was if one has problems with the KJV just shop around and find a version that suits you. There are versions for everyone, I guess.

How many meanings can you find for this? Do your versions make it easier for you to understand?

Deuteronomy 5:7(KJV)
7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me.

You kinda shoot from the hip with your Christianity, don't you?

Gays couldn't have anything close to the tyrannical power they do without massive funding; and the support of the controllers of the MSM (both news and entertainment), the education establishment, and the courts.

So who decided that the KJV is the right one,and the others are inferior? Does that mean the KJV is the word of God and the others are not? Could someone pick up one of the others and in your opinion still learn enough to be saved?

So you are saying that the many translations are translated from original manuscripts, just as the KJV? Or are they translations of the KJV?


Ephesians 2:8 (KJV)

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

I really don't think one needs to bury himself in volumes of written materiel to be saved, regardless of translation.

I'm not saying anything, I honestly don't know that much about it. How "original" are we talking regarding these KJV manuscripts? Like the original,very first writing? If not, how can we be sure they are the best ones to use? I've heard people champion one version over the other, and find it a bit puzzling. They all claim its the inerrant word of God, but which one? If they aren't the same, and some are inferior/superior, how can one say its the inerrant word of God?

First version was written from 1604 to 1611 when it was completed for England.
King James Bible (KJB), is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England, Wiki

Are you saying to be a serious Christian one has to use the King James Version Bible? How 'bout the Chinese or Brazilians? What do they use? One does not need to shop around to find a Bible that says what he wants if he is a serious Christian. He goes to the book store and gets a modern translation and reads and applies it to his daily life. That is something I doubt very seriously you do. I base that on the number of folks over the last forty-one years who go on the attack instead of rejoice with me because I am reading and trying to apply God's Word to my life everyday.

You are being silly. To handle accurately the Word of God one needs to understand what he is reading. Using the most up to date language from a translation of the most reliable manuscripts allows us that privilege. They make reading and understanding God's Word much easier!

The idea I shoot from the hip with my Christianity is an accusation I have not heard before. You are clever but also are foolish not to recognize the value of a serious person wanting to understand and obey God's Word.

Stormin Norman, See Below:

"Amendment XIV,Sec.1 All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges of immunities of citizens of the United States."

No. I'm a fighter pilot.

Do you seriously not recognize me?

That's some seriously funny chit right there.

this was a good one too...

Not unless you're holding hands with John Travolta.

I'll ask again, wise ass. Are you a cop, or le?

If you hit the brakes, do they really fly right by.?

It's a free country right ? That is why we have to putup with the queer world freak show right ? Aprivate busniess owner should be free to do busniess with who they choose . and tell the goverment to [bleep] off

Do I look like a cop to you?

You sound like a cop, and act like one. Are you a leo?

Great photo Blue, that's before sellfies. Lol

I already answered that.

So the queers have more rights than the straight business owners.

The queer colors displayed on the W.H. in their rainbow fashion reminds me of the first time the rainbow was displayed. By God, but it was not to promote homosexual behavior.

Yes.

Until I shoot them with my jet rockets. Then they fall. Then I fly back to base and play some beach volleyball in blue jeans.

What I was saying before the storm knocked my power is that the passage that Scott quoted was an awful translation of the Word in that instance. Go back and read it.

As far as I know, the KJV is the earliest translation of the Bible and accepted by most. Anything else is just a translation of it.

I read, I understand, and if I feel I need a translation I come up with one on my own.

I grow weary of sharing my point of view concerning the Word and having to argue with some sort of saint, self made of course and in his own mind, that I am wrong. I may be, won't be the first time and surely won't be the last.

Simply say, "I disagree" and all will be well with me.

It is not but the oldest is in English so old you cannot understand it. FWIW we know a lot more about Biblical Greek than was known when the translated the King James. Archaeologists have uncovered a lot that have clarified the meanings of Greek words.

However, my friend who can read and translate from his Greek Bible tells me there is really nothing in the KJV that is off enough to give someone any trouble.

There are a bunch of newer translations that are true newer translations from the Greek texts. The text I quoted was a cut and paste I grabbed and not my favourite by far. I must have at least a dozen translations but my personal favourite by far is a NAS large print pulpit Bible with no extra notes. I read it and an not distracted my the thoughts of others but rather choose to let the Holey Spirit give me a note when needed. The large print helps old eyes see there are actually words on the pages. I have read it from Index to Maps several times and am thinking it is about time to do it again.



I agree 100% and could not have said it better. Have a wonderful Independence Day Sir and the best to you and yours.

Beach Volleyball IS the BEST volleyball...

GeoW,



You truly need to do more studying. The Germans had a Bible in their language prior to the King James Version. Therefore It can not be a translation of It. Perhaps the King James Version is a translation of the older German Bible.

Perhaps I should have said translated to the English language. I do not read German.

Scott, I appreciate your understanding.

Geo

We are talking English not German and the KJV was from the Greek. There are many more modern translations done from the Greek. Again there is nothing really wrong with the KJV but it should not be the only true translation used in any in depth study.

A fighter pile-it.

Too funny!

How bout lay off Bluedreaux, he has't been the same since his flippant attitude caused Goose to get killed.

John

" AA uses "higher power" for its participants. They are encouraged to use anything they want as a "higher power"."

Read the book, Alcoholics Anonymous, then post on here with an apology for slandering the Fellowship.

Lot and his family being saved from the total destruction of Sodom might be a type of preview of the rapture.

The bakers refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding party, and the persecution that followed, might help to illustrate the persecution that will follow those rejecting the Mark of the Beast.

That's a lie.

He confused you with Steelhead.

curdog4570,



You sound like a Church of Christ attender. They claim their denomination is not a denomination. AA is no more than another denomination. I didn't slander any "Fellowship". I posted from real knowledge from a friend who attends an AA meeting. Take a look the churches. Almost all use the Bible and reject Its contents. Just take a look at the the Christian forum here.

After I read the book, should I read the Book of Mormon or the Koran? When I want to read something spiritual I will read God's Word, the Bible.

Don't be so sensitive.

The Ringman hath spoken. So let it be written. So let it be done.

Yes, but... Can you discriminate based on national origin. I think the Confederacy was a nation was it not?

not when anybody still alive was born...