Comments about ‘Oregon will oversee settlement process between Christian bakers, lesbian couple’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 28 2014 6:10 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
cavetroll
SANDY, UT

I feel we should be careful in these laws that involve "dictates of conscience." Where as I can see many businesses in Utah not serving a LGBT customer, imagine the unintended consequences of such a law. What if a business owner's conscience prevents him from doing business with lifestyles he/she doesn't agree with, such as missionaries?

"You want a cake for your son's farewell/homecoming? I'm sorry, I don't agree with that lifestyle."

I also don't believe that a lawsuit will settle anything in this matter. People will refuse to do business with a certain portion of the population. People will go to other businesses. Each side will feel discriminated against and bullied.

Brahmabull
sandy, ut

This is an ugly case where the religious beliefs of the owners have seeped into their business. They should remain separate. If I own a grocery store, and I am Mormon, is it against my religion to sell alcohol in my store? My religious beliefs are that I shouldn't drink alcohol, but my business is selling product. That in no way makes the statement that I support drinking alcohol, it supports that people can choose to or to not drink.

You can't sell alcohol, and then if somebody that is Mormon comes in to buy the alcohol (yes, it does happen) deny them service because you don't want to contribute to their sinning. That is ludicrous. You can't likewise operate a bacon stand, and refuse to sell bacon to a jew or Muslim. You also can't make cakes, and refuse to sell a cake to a gay couple because you think they shouldn't be getting married. It doesn't mean to support or even agree with what they are doing. Your beliefs should not be moving in to your business as far as refusing service because you feel like something is a sin.

trueblue87
Provo, UT

@ NewAgeMormon

They didn't ask the couple. It was right there in front of them that the cake was for a gay couple.

There was no screening process other than the couple themselves.

sg
newhall, CA

I am offended by the same sex couple who sued the bakery. Whatever happened to religious freedom? I would not have been surprised had the bakery been owned and operated by a muslim couple and it refused service that nothing would have come of it. This is a blatant attack on Christians and their values and beliefs. Perhaps it is time for all Christians to boycott every single business operated and owned by gays?

pleblian
salt lake city, utah

These rulings are disturbing. I don't agree with those who would refuse to serve anyone LGBT. Nonetheless, the court is, in a very real sense, compelling private businesses to perform a service against their will.

Similar rulings were made against businesses who refused to serve non-whites in the 1960s. So the courts began recognizes "protected classes" of persons who were discriminated upon because of their "status" ie: gender, race, nationality.

These cases seek to expand "status" to categories which are defined by behaviors, not status.

Protection of behaviors is covered by the 1st Amendment...you know the one protecting free exercise of religion. Status is covered by the Fourteenth.

Can I refuse service to a known Mormon because I disagree with their way of life and think they are of the devil? Juggalos? Flipside, can a Mormon refuse service to a LBGT because the Mormon disagrees with the way of life of a LBGT and think they are of the devil? What about an anti-Mormon?

Most disagree with the fact that the lady refused the couple service. But I struggle with the logic that she should be compelled to.

Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

"Most disagree with the fact that the lady refused the couple service. But I struggle with the logic that she should be compelled to."

Keep in mind that one does not have the right to run a business -- they have the privilege. To earn the privilege to run a business you are compelled to follow the rules which includes "serving everyone".

It is just like driving. For the privilege to drive a car, one is compelled to follow traffic law. You don't like the traffic laws? Don't drive. You don't like selling wedding cakes to gay couples? Get out of the cake business.

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

@NewAgeMormon

"For those of you who side with the bakery, would it also be okay for them to ask couples if they had engaged in pre-marital sex, and then refuse to serve them if they had?"

---------
The cake was a symbol of a celebration of an event - a gay wedding. Had the couple asked for a cake with obvious descriptions of pre-marital sex on the cake then it would be OK to refuse them. Asking them whether they had actually engaged in such an act is irrelevant - it is what the cake stands for.

U-tar
Woodland Hills, UT

Brama (Bull)
Seems like you just can't square with the concept that we live in America, where people are free to make their own decisions and choices. It doesn't matter what logic the baker in Oregon is using, he has Freedom to do what he feels. The gay couple can go elsewhere for their cake, have a gay friend bake it or a willing participant. The stores also have Betty Crocker pre mixed cakes for sale.

RDJntx
Austin, TX

Ranch Said"All of you claiming that the 1st Amendment rights of the bakery owners is being violated are ignoring the elephant in the room: The 1st Amendment rights of LGBT supporters to practice their religious beliefs and allow same-sex couples is being violated - BY YOU."

I would disagree. The LGBT couple has every right to go someplace else. the words of those who side with the baker in no way impinge upon the "rights" of the gay couple or any other LGBT couple. I am, in general, a supporter of LGBT rights, but I find this couples desire to force the owners to sell them a cake more offensive than the store owners position. Why would the couple even want a cake from a business that doesn't want their money? They are using thier marriage to make a political statement and I see their putting that political statement first and foremost, incongrous with their desisre to have their relationship accepted by society as a whole. The brouhaha they have fostered does the LGBT cause more harm than good because it turns people who would othersie be on the fence against them.

the truth
Holladay, UT

So let me understand:

The gays believe the constitution gives them the power to force or compel another's personal service or labor.

Isn't that servitude? or slavery? even fascism?

Where will it end?

I would rather we allow freedom, even if its disagreeable, than allow the power to dictate to others.

It's worse than discrimination to force another to not bake a cake. Because you are compelling personal labor and service, They not being denied a general service.

The only "compromise", and only thing the baker need do to conform to any equality law, is let the gay couple come in and buy any already made cake in the store.

Forcing the baker the make a special cake is slavery or servitude, and that is unconstitutional.

Karen R.
Houston, TX

Reading the commentary brought to mind the book, “All I really need to know I learned in kindergarten.” And it occurred to me that public accommodation laws are really just a more sophisticated version of what most, if not all, of us were taught in our first years of schooling. “If you want to bring a treat to class, make sure you bring enough for everyone.” Because it isn’t nice to leave some people out, to unnecessarily hurt someone’s feelings or humiliate them, no matter how much we dislike them. If we want to treat only those we like, we can invite them to a private party at our house. But in the classroom, the nice thing to do is to provide a treat for everyone.

I think the cries of “religious conscience” are really just demands to be exempt from the rules of the classroom. It’s saying, “I shouldn’t have to be nice to everyone because my religion tells me so.”

Not a very nice religion.

Danny Chipman
Lehi, UT

"Sometimes a cake is just a cake." --Counselor Deanna Troi (paraphrasing Freud) to Lt. Cmdr. Data, Star Trek: TNG

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

The articles states:

" Since refusing to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, protests by gay activists outside their Gresham, Ore., bakery forced Aaron and Melissa Klein to move the business into their home while the Christian couple awaited a ruling by state labor investigators"

Deseret News, who are the Christian Couple? The bakers or the customers? Is it possible that the four of them were Christians?

A long time ago, I read a book called "The Human Animal" it was a psychology book. The book clearly expressed what we are seeing here. The dehumanization of those whom we want to attack. "The Lesbian couple" on one side and Aaron and Melissa Klein on the other side, but, they are humans they have names, also are like most of the good people of Utah, they are Christians.

Many LGBT are Christians, many straight supporters of SSM are Christians, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Judge in the case is also Christian.

Bigotry is Un-Christian. May be the Kleins are just misguided, therefore, as a good Christian I would forgive tell them, "go an sin no more".

Cowboy Dude
SAINT GEORGE, UT

And yet Same Sex Marriage is illegal in Oregon. The law makes no sense.

1aggie
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

WWJD?
Ahhh, the dilemma for the faithful.

"The Church’s affirmation of marriage as being between a man and a woman “neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility toward gays and lesbians.” On the contrary, many Church leaders have spoken clearly about the love and respect with which all people are to be treated.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is based on love, respect and agency. Mormons believe that all humans have inherited strengths, weaknesses, challenges and blessings and are invited to live, through the help and grace of God, the principles revealed by Jesus Christ. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints maintains that “God’s universal fatherhood and love charges each of us with an innate and reverent acknowledgment of our shared human dignity. We are to love one another. We are to treat each other with respect as brothers and sisters and fellow children of God, no matter how much we may differ from one another.”
(LDS org "Same Sex Attraction)

J.Chang
duval, FL

The Family
A Proclamation to the World

...marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.

All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

Cowboy Dude

SAINT GEORGE, UT

And yet Same Sex Marriage is illegal in Oregon. The law makes no sense.

-----------

It isn't illegal. It just is not recognized by the state. Big Difference!

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ J.Chang

Ironically, what you just said is why SSM is going to be legalized. Your religion begins and ends with you....

Flashback
Kearns, UT

Utah is headed this same direction via the proposed non-discrimination law that is currently being looked at. There are ample laws that protect against discrimination in housing, employment, and nearly everything else at the federal level. There is no need for such a law at the state level. Pass it and we will live to regret it. Guaranteed.

K
Mchenry, IL

To attend or work a same sex wedding is to condone and support a same sex union. And to profit from it. The bakers would have no trouble selling them any baked good for any other reason or occassion in their lives. It has nothing to do with not wanting to serve someone considered in a state of sin or not. It is just about being asked to support and participate in a wedding their religious beliefs do not allow them to participate. This was a bad decision by the courts. If they refuse to sell them a donut on Sunday or batch of cupcakes for a birthday I would agree with the courts. What is next, a judgement for a couple from a church that refuses to wed the pair?

to comment

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