Discussion
  • Read More
    DionneFarrisVEVO ✓officialStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:57pm

    For any who think this is a First Amendment issue:

    There’s a difference between refusing to sponsor a message and refusing to serve a customer. Additionally, there’s a difference between refusing to serve a customer and refusing to serve an entire demographic of customers. It actually takes a great deal of stupidity to break the law the way these bakers did. A crafty bigot could’ve legally gotten away with it.

    If these people refused to put certain text or imagery on their cake, that would have been fine because they don’t have to sponsor that message. If these people refused service to the individuals because they were belligerent or rude, they could do that too. However, these customers wanted the same wedding cake that everyone else gets. Then the owners explained to them why they refused to serve them: Because sexuality.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      accordingtoDionneFarrisVEVO ✓official
      7/04/15 2:10pm

      …and this is why Azucar Bakery in Denver did not have to write homophobic shit on the cakes they baked. They were perfectly willing to sell jerkwad two bible-shaped cakes, but they wouldn’t do the writing for him. they were willing to serve him and even sell him the decorating bags and tips so he could write his hate out his ownself.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      DionneFarrisVEVO ✓officialaccordingto
      7/04/15 2:13pm

      And the political right creates a false equivalence between literally every law. “Oh, I can’t punch this homeless guy, but he can sit on the sidewalk all he wants?”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Harold OslerStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:35pm

    I get that there needed to be some kind of punishment, but $135000? That’s just ridiculous and only adds fuel to the bigots who are using them as icons. And who gets all that money?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      RX QueenHarold Osler
      7/04/15 1:37pm

      Mostly the lawyer.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      heart_of_pyriteHarold Osler
      7/04/15 1:39pm

      I agree it’s an exorbitant amount. The worst part is that you know they’re going to make bank with a gofundme campaign after this.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    burnttoastsundaeStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:41pm

    I’m against discrimination but also against forcing people to make you a cake when they don’t want to. Do we really have to sue every bigot? Won’t this just upset them more?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Evikerburnttoastsundae
      7/04/15 1:46pm

      Operating a business in the public sphere means you agree to comply with anti-discrimination laws. Nobody forced the business owners to do that.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Cocopop!burnttoastsundae
      7/04/15 1:49pm

      I realize that this comparison isn’t perfect, because it isn’t based on religious beliefs, but there were many restaurants in this country who refused to serve people of color until there was enough pressure placed on them. One way to place pressure on these businesses is to sue them.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Bears for PresidentStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:39pm

    I do sort of feel for the bakers. I mean, after all we all know that the original translation of Mark 6:41 reads:

    And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before them; and the two fishes divided he among them all, except for the girls who liked kissing other girls because yuck.

    I mean...what’s a religious person to do?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      KaraNextWeekBears for President
      7/04/15 1:44pm

      Everyone knows the Bible says love thy neighbor, as long as they’re not a dirty homo.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Desperate for a Shag GilesBears for President
      7/04/15 1:54pm

      When people cite scripture to explain why homosexuality is wrong, this is what I imagine is written.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Global BeetStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:56pm

    That buzzing you hear is the sound of 10,000,000 conservatives getting outrage boners.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      accordingtoGlobal Beet
      7/04/15 2:17pm

      Vacation plans for Oregon next year:

      - cause havoc at Red and Black Cafe in Portland, and then dare them to do anything about it

      - go in to this bakery and ask for a penis-shaped cake that says “christians suck”

      - drink beer and eat berries

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      tomcat1483Global Beet
      7/04/15 2:21pm

      Oh god, it can't be that many. Lets hope its only 1,000 they are loud but not numerous

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    mediumrarefiedStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 2:17pm

    It’s funny how the conservatives are all about “states’ rights” until they don’t like the law the state made. Then all of a sudden they’re all about the “constitution.”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Cocopop!mediumrarefied
      7/04/15 3:36pm

      Needs more stars.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      HenryKillingermediumrarefied
      7/04/15 4:20pm

      ...And then they ignore the fact that the Constitution also says they’re wrong.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Denver is too damn highStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 6:25pm

    I’m torn. I don’t think they need to be sued. they just need a big ass sign on their front door that says they hate people who are gay. Shout it from the rooftops and let the chips fall

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      NoahDenver is too damn high
      7/04/15 8:06pm

      What about for inciting harassment of the refused customers? Can they be sued for that?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Denver is too damn highNoah
      7/04/15 9:10pm

      No I don’t think you can be sued for other people’s behavoir. You missed the point.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    diasdiemStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 1:52pm

    Yeesh. $135,000 is a lot of money for hurt feelings and the inconvenience of having to find another baker. I get a few thousand as a fine, that’s enough to hurt, but unless their liability insurance covers this, $135,000 is ruinous.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      pdxwhydiasdiem
      7/04/15 2:28pm

      THAT’S THE POINT.

      The bakers broke Oregon law against discrimination in the public sphere (Mr. Avanakian makes that very clear in the ruling) and so must pay that fine, plus legal fees.

      There was a time no so long ago where African Americans, Asians and Jews were openly not served in metropolitan areas in Oregon. The state has NO DESIRE to tolerate that type of bullshit EVER, and so if you operate a business in Oregon, you had better serve EVERYONE who comes into your shop with dignity and respect.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      diasdiempdxwhy
      7/04/15 2:46pm

      So not only must the owners of the bakery be punished, but so must their employees, and their employees’ families, and the myriad other businesses that provided goods and services to that bakery? A few thousand dollars fined, and the owners don’t get to go on vacation that year and have to dip into their savings to support the business for a while, and a lesson is learned. Break them completely, and you also hurt a lot of other people who did nothing wrong.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    dalilaStassa Edwards
    7/04/15 2:01pm

    OK, but more importantly: the cake in that photo is awesome.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ShannaGStassa Edwards
      7/04/15 2:27pm

      There used to be a time when you kept religion and politics out of business. A “Christian business” is understood to be a business that sells goods or services that are directly relevant to Christian interests. A Christian bookstore, for example, sells books dealing with Christian themes. If you’re going to claim to run a Christian pizzeria, every pizza better have bible verses spelled out in pepperoni. A Christian hair salon better be specializing in shaving crosses and other Christian iconography into your fade. And a Christian bakery had better specialize in Christian baked goods. Otherwise, you can’t do business on the pretense that you’ll serve anybody who has money and then pull the “we don’t serve your kind here.” If they were truly a “Christian bakery,” the couple may have immediately eliminated them from consideration.

      Put another way: say the guy who runs the gas station down the street is Muslim and an American citizen. He hears you say you’re on your way to the new bbq joint in town, and he refuses to sell you gas because eating pork is against his deeply-held religious beliefs. The religious conseratives would be calling for his head on a platter, claiming he can’t do that here, because ‘Murica.


      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        SessileRaptorShannaG
        7/04/15 3:24pm

        About 8-9 years ago there was a kerfuffle in my hometown about somali muslim taxi drivers refusing service to people who were carrying alcohol. Not like “that guy’s got an open bottle of beer.” but waiting at the airport in the taxi line and grilling potential fares to find out if they were carrying wine or booze home in their luggage, and refusing them a ride if they were. There was also an issue with cabs refusing to carry dogs, which is a business choice until you get into refusing service animals, which they were.

        There was some heat and light, the usual suspects complained about mooslems and sharia law, the taxi commission started slapping down 30 day loss of medallion for infractions and I haven’t heard much about it since.

        I can only presume that our religious friends on the right will be revisiting that case and demanding that their brothers in arms be allowed to deny rides based on their deeply held beliefs.

        I’ll just be over here, not holding my breath.

        Reply
        <