Quantcast

Comments about ‘Oregon bakery shuts down after gay rights attacks’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Sept. 11 2013 9:00 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Amalgamate
Los Angeles, CA

crunchem-youre sadly misinfomred just like other religious sheep. They were not harassed because there is no evidence-any police reports? no-check, any witnesses besides them? no, check, their word is meaningless

@look_to_god
in flux, UT

Some are sure to pounce on this saying 'it was a religion being attacked, not a business', but I'm surprised no one else has mentioned a case I learned about in my political theory class.

Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah

I don't recall which poster it was that said there's a difference between freedom of religion and freedom of practice (I can't say I comprehend where/how there is a separation...), but as per the (referenced) quote in wikipedia it said, "it was deemed unconstitutional, with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision, “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection” "

So I keep wondering why this has been ignored and forgotten...? This was back in 1993. How did we take a 180 in ten short years?

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Counterintelligence..seriously? That aside this is ground this country has tred many a time. Every time the definition of human/civil rights is expanded those most exercised about their own freedom go crazy, and generally their objections to someone else's rights is couched in their religious beliefs. Long term the conservatives lose..always. Not that they give up, witness Mr/Ms Counterintelligence, basically denying 100 years of civil rights laws. However if he or she tried to deny service to a Black person because of their race or if they lived in Oregon their sexual orientation, they would lose.

WRK
Riverton, UT

I find it most interesting that the people who demand they have rights are the ones who are least likely to let others have rights. Lest I be misunderstood, I am talking of those on the left, to include the Gay/Lesbian community. We should only let others have rights when it is their way of letting others have rights. Very hipocritical set of people. So glad not to be numbered among them.

RedShirtMIT
Cambridge, MA

To "StraightGrandmother" I hate to tell you this, but you are wrong.

The first ammendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" That means there will be no state religion like the Church of England, or anything prohibiting you from exercising (practicing) your religion.

WRK
Riverton, UT

So, by one individual's post from Texas, if I had a cake shop that sold cakes that showed what the KKK would like to do to all those who are not of their race, then that would be OK. There are some things called morals that seem to be lacking in today's community.

WRK
Riverton, UT

@Lane Myer
"Klan members are not listed on the state law of whom one cannot discriminate against."
Yes they are, you cannot discriminate agaisnt a religion, and to Klan members, that is a religion.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Counter Intelligence

"actually, simply put; yes they do"

No, they don't. That's why we don't have a need for civil rights activists to engage in sit-ins at diners that refuse to serve black people.

@look_to_god
in flux, UT

Oops. Haha. Correction - 20 years, not ten. In my defense, I had the class about ten years ago...

Thinking out loud here... (figuratively)... What would happen if someone in the wedding industry (since they seem to be the obvious targets) was approached for providing services for an LGBT ceremony and said to prospective customers, "I'm concerned that my discomfort in being required to attend a function that runs counter to my beliefs and conscience will have a negative impact on how well I am able to focus on the services you wish me to provide." Is this not a legitimate statement and concern? Would they still be sued for how their conscience comes into play?

This may sound absurd to those who think this ALL absurd, but I think it's legit. If the law required me to give service to members of my abusive family (but of the emotional/psychological sort which is not so documentable), I could well be so distressed that said services would automatically be distracted and therefore below standard. How is the sincere emotional reaction to a forced violation of conscience different?

New to Utah
PAYSON, UT

LGBT activists are intolerant. They demonstated mob rule can force a business to close its doors. It is nothing new in the Portland megaplex. Having lived in Oregon for 10 years, I can assure you that liberal domination of Multanomah county has been a millstone for the nearly 4 million Oregonians who deserve much better. It is sad that other businesses were forced to abide by the dictates of the mob. Portland's former mayor was a gay who was involved in a possible criminal sexual encounter with an underage staffer but eventually was swept under the carpet.

techpubs
Sioux City, IA

So here is a question for all of you who are saying service cannot be denied.
If I have a bakery and someone asks me to bake a cake, do I or do I not have the right to simply say no without giving any reason why I am not going to do it? Or do you believe that I have to agree to an offer of work simply because I opened a business? You must remember that there is a difference between having regular cakes on the shelf for sale and contracting to bake a special cake for someone.

Jeff
Temple City, CA

No where in the stories about this (and similiar episodes in other states) does it say that there was an absolute refusal to grant all services to LGBT clients. The bakery did not refuse all services to the lesbian couple; there was only a refusal to provide a wedding cake for a same-gender wedding.

Asking ethically and not legalistically (the law often baffles me; it is more concerned with precedent than ethics or morality), would such a bakery be required to make an obscene cake? How about a racist cake, or a celebration of terrorism?

I think that a bakery (and a photographer, too, for that matter) should be able to refuse to engage in speech that violates the personal views of the baker (or photographer). I think it is ethically and morally wrong for someone to require a bakery to provide something that violates the personal ethics or morality of the baker. I also think it is wrong for the bakery to refuse to sell its normal products to someone who belongs to a protected status. These are not synonymous actions,and should not be treated as such under the law.

ClarkHippo
Tooele, UT

@New to Utah

If the gay and lesbian community continues to overplay its hand, people will eventually get tired of their act.

You want same-sex marriage? Okay. You want anti-discrimination laws? Okay.

You want to be able to shove your lifestyle down everyone's throat and use mob rule to attack and intimidate anyone who criticizes you even the smallest degree?

Forget it!

zoar63
Mesa, AZ

The way to have handled this would have been for the owner to agree to do make the wedding cake for the couple but inform them that all profit made from the sale would be donated to a pro traditional marriage organization on their behalf and their name and addresss would be forwarded to the organization so they could send them a thank you card. The couple is still getting the service and they cannot dictate how the owner will use the money received for the services provided.

ClarkHippo
Tooele, UT

Not surprised one bit by this story.

Apparently some in the gay and lesbian community believe the recent Supreme Court rulings regarding DOMA and Prop 8 now give them license to behave like vigilantes. And, thanks to the help of the media and liberal politicians, its only going to get worse.

I easily see a day in which Christians will be the ones forced into the closet, whether its the workplace, the school building or college campus or even in regular contacts.

It will be those who are LDS, Catholic and Baptist who will one day be the biggest target of bullies in public schools. It will be religious buildings and conservative businesses which will be targeted for violence. And freedom of speech will more and more turn into, "You can speak just as long as it is 100% PC."

And those who are currently the loudest advocates for open-mindedness, tolerance and respect: those who constantly preach against bullying and harassment. where will they be?

Cricket noises

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

Jeff,
"Asking ethically and not legalistically (the law often baffles me; it is more concerned with precedent than ethics or morality), would such a bakery be required to make an obscene cake? How about a racist cake, or a celebration of terrorism?"

-------------
I think the best way to explain this is, have they ever made an obscese cake for someone else? Or a racist cake? If they have, they need to do it for everyone.

Had they made a wedding cake for others? Yes. Now they would not do so for a gay couple. That is what makes it discrimination under the law.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

It is still very unclear where any vigilantism or harassment occurred. It actually appears the folks who were fighting for equality were merely ensuring the laws on the books were enforced and then expressed their intent not to patron other for-profit businesses that aided a non-compliant, law-breaking bakery. At what point did the activists violate a law or attack anyone? I ask that honestly, I am not aware of any claimed legal violations on the part of the activists.

In fact, short of files being charged or evidence being brought forth that these activists did anything illegal, it seems very dangerous for the DesNews to title this an "attack." It's sensationalistic, irresponsible journalism at best, borderline demagoguery at worst.

The article's title ought to read: "Non-compliant Oregon Bakery Shuts Down Due to Owner's Continued Refusal to Obey the Law."

greatbam22
andrews afb, MD

So isn't in interesting how ONLY religious persons are "bigots or discrimatory". I guess you have never been in any minority neighborhood. Do you really believe a white guy is going to be treated the same walking into a black barber shop or some other minority owned business that mostly does business with their own minority.

You think that religious people have a monopoly on discrimination? It is perfectly fine maybe in a minority neighborhood because maybe you weren't going to go their anyways right?

Some people have just been watching / listening to tooooo much liberal media.

Christ loved the sinner not the sin. He said "go and sin no more" You can love someone but not be supportive of their choices. I know it is hard for some of you to understand because you have been told over and over how much that religious folks hate homosexuals.

zoar63
Mesa, AZ

@ClarkHippo

"It will be those who are LDS, Catholic and Baptist who will one day be the biggest target of bullies in public schools. It will be religious buildings and conservative businesses which will be targeted for violence. And freedom of speech will more and more turn into, "You can speak just as long as it is 100% PC."

LDS, Catholic and Baptist; that is a huge voting block. Now if we could just put aside our religious differences and unite for a common cause and get Islamic people on board whose views on gay marriage are similar, politicians would take notice.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Just go somewhere else and get your cake!

It's just that simple.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments