It's the cost of doing business in America. You must serve everyone. This is not about individual religous expression. This is about a business.
The article above suggests they will appeal the ruling.
What Im waiting for is when 2 Jewish black former Marine gay men want to have a wedding performed at a Mosque.. Wonder what side the ACLU is going to side with...
Edit to add: I could care less who marrys who....the problems will lie in the benefits like children custody and employee's spouse benefits. I wished they would have spent more time hammering out the Civil Union aspect.Given the same things a traditional marriage entails then we could leave the religious aspect completely out of it.
but then again the religious part is what BOTH sides want to use as a tool of division.
[This message has been edited by fireboss (edited 07-06-2015).]
How about we explore why a gag order was included in the ruling?
The text is on pages 42/43. Personally, I have no idea why that would be necessary. Maybe, since they continue to be in business, it's a problem that they advertise behavior that's illegal in the state (as they have posted signs on the shop's door and online content on the business FB page saying that they wouldn't make wedding cakes for homosexuals in the future). Similar as if they posted signs saying "do don't serve Asian people here".
EDIT: I guess the Asians can count themselves lucky that the men that wrote the bits and pieces that eventually became the Bible didn't know they even existed. Otherwise they may have been somethings against them in there, too.
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 07-06-2015).]
It's the cost of doing business in America. You must serve everyone. This is not about individual religous expression. This is about a business.
The article above suggests they will appeal the ruling.
really.. then these signs are illegal
"no shirt ,no service" no shoes ,no service"
see the problem is, it was a set up.. The gay couple , or any couple that's getting married has no funds to hire a lawyer, but the gay movement does.. This was premeditated, before they even walked into the bakery.. next up. forcing churches to marry them.. This couple didn't get told sorry we can't make your cake and then hired a lawyer, the lawyer was already on retainer before they ever stepped foot into the bakery..
This couple didn't get told sorry we can't make your cake and then hired a lawyer, the lawyer was already on retainer before they ever stepped foot into the bakery..
Can you find in the link posted earlier where it says that?
see the problem is, it was a set up.. The gay couple , or any couple that's getting married has no funds to hire a lawyer, but the gay movement does.. This was premeditated, before they even walked into the bakery.. next up. forcing churches to marry them.. This couple didn't get told sorry we can't make your cake and then hired a lawyer, the lawyer was already on retainer before they ever stepped foot into the bakery..
I'm all for gay rights, but I wholly believe this to be wrong. You should be able to refuse service for any reason, IMO.
Especially those negroes, refuse them service. And Jews. Oh and kykes, spics, and gooks. And Germans, we don't like Germans. And women without a male escort who are not dressed head to toe in a burka. (Do you see this slippery slope I'm alluding to?)
Especially those negroes, refuse them service. And Jews. Oh and kykes, spics, and gooks. And Germans, we don't like Germans. And women without a male escort who are not dressed head to toe in a burka. (Do you see this slippery slope I'm alluding to?)
Honestly, if a company wants to be racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... I'll gladly set up shop right next to them and open my business to all.
Yes, I do think people should be able to refuse service for any reason. Those companies will also likely fail.
Can you find in the link posted earlier where it says that?
A link, nope, the political pendant for the local news did a little story on this, they run a daily every 7:55 am.(Keller at large). and this was one of them.. He or the channel called the law office to get more info and they happened to give the date, of the retainer, and he commented on the piece that it's funny that someone would seek a retainer 15 days before hand..
A link, nope, the political pendant for the local news did a little story on this, they run a daily every 7:55 am.(Keller at large). and this was one of them.. He or the channel called the law office to get more info and they happened to give the date, of the retainer, and he commented on the piece that it's funny that someone would seek a retainer 15 days before hand..
Seems very unlikely to me that a law office would give any client information to someone who just called and asked, especially a radio station...
In August 2013, the brides filed a complaint with the state Bureau of Labor and Industries, and the agency brought charges against the Kleins in January 2014.
------------------ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In order to be protected by Oregon´s discrimination laws, employees must be employed by a company with at least one or more employees [snip]
So, if one of the bakery's employees refused to bake the cake... Point taken.
quote
So, if a gay-owned business would refuse service to a straight person because of their sexual orientation and said so and the straight person would sue them, you think that a US court would not side with the straight person?
Actually, if such a case were brought forward, do you not believe it would have been thrown out before we ever heard of it?
You have to remember that the constitution is referring to individual rights, not business rights. You can, as an individual, decide to follow whatever religious convictions you desire. Your business cannot.
Especially those negroes, refuse them service. And Jews. Oh and kykes, spics, and gooks. And Germans, we don't like Germans. And women without a male escort who are not dressed head to toe in a burka. (Do you see this slippery slope I'm alluding to?)
Any business should be allowed to refuse service for any reason they see fit.
This benefits everyone. Especially since we would then know who NOT to do business with, and they would soon no longer be an issue (out of business.)
Making everyone allow people they don't like doesn't solve the problem, it makes it worse... Because we don't know.
