We got into a heated debate at work about this story.

http://www.kgw.com/story/news/local/2015/02/02/ruling-gresham-bakery-discriminated-against-same-sex-couple/22760387/

I work for a company that bills itself as a Christian company. Well, yesterday I let the cake out of the bakery and showed support for gay people.

It was even more surprising because a coworker got involved in the debate and he is a very quiet man. Another coworker said that they thought he was recently married and that no one seems to know about it. She speculated on his orientation.

Regardless, I thought it was cool that he jumped in and him and I tag teamed the new Pentecostal guy who is very arrogant and open about his religion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2015 10:59AM by Elder Berry.

Great to read your post. I am caught up in the Ireland one.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/american-bakers-in-own-gay-cake-row-rally-behind-ashers-family-31240281.html

Melissa Klein can't stop crying and saying things about being good people just following their consciences.

It is puke-inducing to me. She literally can't stop her tears. She turned people away because they were gay. And she can't stop crying. Tells me a whole lot.

I don't understand how writing something on a cake is the same as refusing to bake one?

I can go buy something from a store and if they do customizations I know that not everything I tell them to write, they are obligated to write it. It is common sense. But if they refuse even to sell me the object UN-customized that is totally different.

People and their beliefs trying to become protected classes of people. Dallying Hoax would be proud.

People are such nonthinking for themselves sheep.

So hateful !!!!! I hate them.... yeah yeah I know.

The whole issue comes down to people wanting to exclude those they don't like from being members of their society, from being treated like valuable human beings.

Some of it includes the mentality of "shunning" -- that if I shun you for your beliefs/actions, you'll come around to my way of thinking. Which, of course, doesn't work at all.

Glad you found some surprising support for opposing those ideas. Those who hold them are fast becoming a minority...and the fear of becoming a minority is part of the reason those who hold them are being so stubborn and vocal. Nobody wants to accept their ideas are outdated and/or unpopular, even when they are :)

ificouldhietokolob, yes!
What gets me too is the arrogance of people who say that they are just trying to follow their consciences. And when they involve a faith perspective, then it becomes so insulting to other members of that same faith population who just happen to believe differently with regards to the particular issue. All of a sudden they are speaking for the whole Christian population......I don't think so!

(1) It may be an unpopular view, but I support the right of people to discriminate in selling their goods and services (except basic necessities). The proper response is to withhold your money from them if you don't agree with their policies, and encourage others to do the same. I personally would have NO problem providing services regardless of sexual orientation.

(2) It is also an unpopular view, but I've read the Bible 17 times cover to cover and NEVER found any scripture justifying - let alone mandating - that believers not provide services for gay weddings. True, the Bible says homosexual behavior is sinful. But Jesus purportedly spent a lot of his time with the people his peers deemed most sinful. Jesus also taught that divorce and remarriage to someone else is a sin, but most Christians provide services to divorcees when they marry again.

Both Solomon (in Proverbs) and Paul said that if a person's "enemy" asks for food or drink, the person should give willingly, and that it would only serve to bring down "coals of fire" on the head of the enemy. Jesus taught that if a person sued you and prevailed, you should give him more than what he sued you for, and if a Roman soldier compelled you to carry his pack for a mile, you should carry it 2 miles. Thus, it is my opinion that the current Christian view that there is something wrong with providing services in connection with gay weddings is a modern adaptation and has no sound basis in scripture.

I'm not qualified to offer my opinion to Christians, but here it is anyway: if a Christian wants to get "sinners" to come to God, the best way to do it is through cheerful and loving service. This should apply equally regardless of the perceived sin, be it homosexuality or looking at a person of the opposite sex with lust, which Jesus also condemned.

I think if businesses want to reserve the right to refuse service for any reason, they should post it prominently, so people know and can go somewhere else, instead of being humiliated when they are refused. This was offered up as an option in one community, and you know what? Businesses don't want to post their beliefs in that way, because of the blowback they get. You would think they would be proud of boldly declaring their faith. The truth is, no one is buying anyone's approval. They are buying their cake, flowers, etc. It's business, and if they're in business, they should take the money and give the service, anything else is none of their business.

USN77 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> (1) It may be an unpopular view, but I support the
> right of people to discriminate in selling their
> goods and services (except basic necessities).

I really liked your post except for this unpopular view of yours. We'll agree to disagree here.

The idea of "discriminate in selling" is abhorrent to me. You are either in the public domain in your offerings or you are not. Discrimination should not be a part of selling anything without reason. And you go on to detail in the rest of your reply why this particular situation is so absurd in its discrimination.

The reasons to discriminate should be as few and as strong as possible in my opinion. Not selling things to minors. Not selling guns to people with a history of using them against other people. These seem like good reasons to discriminate. Not selling to people with a sexual orientation? Makes no sense. Where would the bad reasons to discriminate end if all were allowed to openly discriminate for religious reasons? In a holy war?

I know there are people who would like to use their religious reasons to withhold services to other races.

Suppose you ran a bakery, and somebody came in, and asked you to make a cake, decorate it with blood-red frosting, and black letters that say, "ISIS ROCKS!"

Would you do it?

Personally, I find the very idea so abhorrent that I would suggest they take their business elsewhere. I'm not anti-Muslim in general, but I am most definitely anti-ISIS.

I think each of us has to draw the line somewhere. It's a matter of conscience. (And no, I'm not trying to equate gay marriage with support of ISIS. Don't even go there. I was trying to find an illustration of something so morally abhorrent to me that I would not accept the person's business.)

I agree with you on this USN77. I really don't see how selling or not selling a gay couple a cake encourages, supports or discourages homosexuality. It's just a cake. Still, it's mean and judgmental to take your opinions to such an extreme as to refuse serving food to that person. If there was a serious chance that the regular customers would stop patronage for selling a cake to gays I might have some sympathy for the bakers.

However, if I sold cakes and someone asked me to write something offensive like "Allah loves Jihadist Martyrs" I wouldn't want to do it and wouldn't want to be forced to do it. This wouldn't have anything to do with my religious bias. I cannot imagine comparing that with a simple gay couple's wedding cake.

I agree that basic necessities are different. I strongly object to pharmacies that will not sell birth control or morning after pills that have been prescribed by a doctor. No one should have the right to deny another person's health need no matter how strongly they feel they have a right to judge. I was denied birth control pills but I wasn't using them for contraception. I had another health issue that required me to consume hormones. I was dumbfounded that not only the pharmacist felt he had a right to judge me but also my insurance company. A person's health is nobody else's business.

Very easy to say until you are the one who wants a simple unthreatening thing like a cake and can't get it.

Supporting "the right of people to discriminate in selling their goods and services (except basic necessities)" is really opening up the Pandora's box--starting with cake and ending in "who knows what?

And who will decide what are the basic necessities you mention? You think that won't get complicated? What is a basic necessity to a christian may not be the same as a basic necessity to anyone else. This is pushing everything back to what the extreme religions want: to use their own convenient definitions based on their dogma as a license for bigotry.

Do we really need to burden human kindness with so many disclaimers? Should basic equality and human rights really be subject to religion?

You're either working for the public or not. You have to choose. But if you're open to the public, then you are OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. "No shirt, No shoes--No service" is about as far as you can go with discrimination.

There are stores that are not open to the public. They do custom work or only take an exclusive clientele and they market themselves that way. You cannot walk in off the street and buy the product. That type of business is an option for these people. But that isn't what these people want, is it! They want it both ways. They want to have their cake and eat it too. (Sorry about that last one, couldn't help it.)

blueorchid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But that isn't what these people
> want, is it! They want it both ways. They want to
> have their cake and eat it too. (Sorry about that
> last one, couldn't help it.)

They want to sell their baked goods to homosexuals (these people loved this bakery) and tell them how they can use them. Sorry, when the product walks out the door, no dissembling required.

Not supplying goods based on discrimination is one thing, being expected to compromise your beliefs in messages that you are expected to add to your goods is another.

I think I understand you. The with the writing on the wall I mean cake right?

As for no supplying goods that is a big thing. What if your beliefs include having no other gods before your god and providing cake for the glorification of one of those other gods? Is that one thing?

We have a window and door manufacturer in the area who's name contains a "t" and it looks like a cross in their title. That, alone would cause me to not do business with them. Just sayin'.

RB

As soon as someone starts using the Bible to justify their position, all I hear is blah blah blah blah blah. I believe in being kind to myself and other humans. What else do we need?

This always makes me wonder about the IQs of businss owners. I am in the wedding business. In my business, we offer services to all couples. Aside from all of the LGBT issues, why would a business turn down $$? Only an IQ-less wonder would do that. I am in business to make money. Otherwise, I'd quit! DUH!!!!

I can see that. By the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat. Did The Bible's god command his people not to work for pagans, homosexuals, etc.?

If you didn't believe that gay marriage was anything less than sin would you refuse a friend their wedding invitation because they were gay?

Yup, long live our rights! The right to say 'yes', the right to say 'no', the right to disagree, and the right to 'choose', especially the right to 'choose to go elsewhere if we can't get what we want at a certain store'.

I hate Brussel Sprouts, but if I go into a restaurant and find that they serve Brussel Sprouts and demand they stop serving them, they'd tell me in no uncertain terms what to go DO with myself. And it's perfectly in their right. Do I have the right to sue? FUCK no! It's the owner's restaurant, he can run it the way he wants. It's ME that can piss off and go find a restaurant that doesn't have Brussel Sprouts. God, it's not rocket science, for fuck sake.

Just remember one thing. If 'they' can take the rights from a bakery, they can take the rights from you and I.

Long live our rights! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just remember one thing. If 'they' can take the
> rights from a bakery, they can take the rights
> from you and I.

They aren't taking rights away. The bakery as a business is not an individual not matter how much you want it to be one.

Corporations are legally considered individuals and this protects actual individuals who run them from being considered at fault. It the people who refused cake were responsible they would be charged with discrimination.

Why is this so hard for people to get? Oh, yeah, it is the farce of media promoting this as this couple against a gay couple. Brussels sprouts is a lame example.

How about a restaurant serving Black people? Much better example.

For anyone who thinks this is about cake or the sale of any other foodstuffs or minor goods, I offer the following:

Up until 1969 police would raid bars where gay people would hang out and arrest them for doing what so many other straight people were doing at the same time in the same city: Hanging out with friends and having a drink.

The Stonewall Riots occurred the summer of 1969 when gay people had had enough. The marginalized gay people, a lot of them drag queens or transgendered stood up to the police and with the support of a diverse community put a stop to that treatment starting with the barricade at the Stonewall Inn.

Things started to get better as gay people got a toe hold on equality, but, it still wasn't until 1973 that homosexuality was declassified as a mental disorder--by straight people. That did not stop the Mormons at BYU however from coercing the gay kids into electroshock therapy through the use of emotional blackmail or making their kids feel bad enough to kill themselves.

The first half of the last century many homosexuals were put in institutions by their families with the help of a family doctor simply for being who they were. All the while the public at large were enjoying the talents of gay people on Broadway and in the movies to mention just a few venues.

Once the Nazis were conquered and those who survived were let out of the death camps, many of the gay people with the pink triangles in the death camps were carted to prison to finish their sentences for being gay.

This is where we come from. We are not going to be told you won't sell us a cake that you would sell to anyone else on the planet simply because we are gay. We are done.

First it’s the cake, then next thing you know it's the Napoleons, and next thing you know you can't even get a brownie.

I thought this thread was going to be about how mormons think it's okay to just show up at your door unannounced.

What Blueorchid said!!!!

I M H O!!!

The real issue here is whether or not I may choose the clientele with whom I wish to do business.

If I own an apartment house and I wish to do business with only senior citizens is it my right to do so with my own property?

How dare you tell me with whom I must do business.

OKAY!!! Everybody jump on me!

thedesertrat1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If I own an apartment house and I wish to do
> business with only senior citizens is it my right
> to do so with my own property?

It is a straw man because it is a niche market.

If the bigots were only in the non-wedding baking they would have had no problems because they liked the people and these people bought their baked goods regularly. When they found out this mother and her daughter were having a gay wedding, they went all heterosexual on them.

All of the sudden this was a heterosexuals only bakery.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.

In my privately owned business that serves the public (operative word being my private), I get to decide who I will and won't serve.

Being a big stompy foot and forcing people to associate (whether business or personal) only breeds contempt.

Anti-gay bigots will simply NOT serve gay people for other reasons. They'll have scheduling conflicts, or have some reason why the gay people can't be accommodated.

Bottom line - the gay people still won't be accommodated and nothing will be solved.

Win an argument by reason rather than by force and coercion at the end of a government gun.

For the record - I am in business to make money. I have never refused service to anybody and most likely wouldn't.

However, if you tell me I must serve you and that I am obligated to serve you and that society demands I serve you I will tell you to f*&k off and have a great day.

Of course you can decide who you will serve in your own business. What you don't get to decide is other people's reactions to your exclusions.

And yes, there are plenty of legitimate ways to get out of serving someone if you want to. Only a fool however announces their own personal bigotry as one of those ways and expects to be backed up by decent society.

As a gay man fighting for equality, I often am in the situation where the extreme christian right wants to purchase our product. I sell it to them. It's what you do.

Again. It's not about whether they get the cake or not. Its about equality. Equal means both parties win. It means there's a level playing field. It means no one has to be the loser because both parties understand the beauty of reciprocity.

And you reduce people struggles for equality to a "stompy foot?"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2015 04:25PM by blueorchid.

Sparky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> However, if you tell me I must serve you and that
> I am obligated to serve you and that society
> demands I serve you I will tell you to f*&k off
> and have a great day.

You and your business are not the same thing. The owners of my company are learning the hard way that they are not the personality of their company and they can't dictate things to exist merely because they own the company.

They are learning to either let others run it or learn to be better managers of people.

Likewise, your customers aren't hand picked by you if you are in a business offering to all that come to you. You have a right to refuse service legally and a right to refuse service that would involve a civil suit if customers are upset with your refusal and they have no legal recourse.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2015 04:24PM by blueorchid.