1
8
9

Bakery Will Stop Making Wedding Cakes After Losing Discrimination Case (denver.cbslocal.com)

submitted by bobthereddituser

all 49 comments
sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]Future_Cat_Horder 5 ポイント6 ポイント

Leaving an opening for someone to sell bigger better non discriminatory cakes in the area. Everyone wins.

[–]hcirtsafonos -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Except those of us who appreciate freedom.

[–]emergent_properties [score hidden]

You are free to do as you please.

The market is free to crush you for it.

[–]Rx16 [score hidden]

Freedom for who? The homosexual couple who wanted to buy a cake or the business owner who could only benefit from such a transaction?

[–]Richmoar [score hidden]

Yeah, no. This is an anti-business as it gets.

[–]Drumlin 1 ポイント2 ポイント

I believe the phrase is "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

[–]ApplebeesWageslave 0 ポイント1 ポイント

"So I have to sell wedding cakes to gay people if they ask? Ok then, NOBODY GETS A WEDDING CAKE!" D8 Overreact much? I hope this guy feels good about not compromising his beliefs when he goes out of business. My dad was a baker and wedding cakes are the main money maker in the business. Even small ones can be a few hundred dollars depending on the designs.

[–]Labarge28 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Eh, I don't think it's that he's trying to be spiteful. It all comes back to the original scenario, in that he didn't want to sell a gay couple a wedding cake/have his business "supporting" a gay wedding. The courts came back and said you either sell them to everyone, or no one. The only way for him to continue upholding his original stance (albeit a financially bad one) is to not sell them at all.

[–]Eurynom0s 6 ポイント7 ポイント

Honestly from gay couples' side of things I'm not sure I see why you want to force people who hate what you are to be involved in your wedding. Especially homophobic wedding photographers, why do you even want them there?

[–]Sonmi-452 3 ポイント4 ポイント

That's not the point. The point is that business people who think they can discriminate need to be reminded of their civic obligation to serve the public without discriminating.

If a black guy was refused a cake because of his skin color, the entire country would be all over this baker and his attitude. Now, we're extending that to another group that is tired of taking this same bullshit - gay people.

Religious people used religion for justification on discriminating against black folks for centuries. And now that reasoning has been thrown in the dustbin of history. This man is free to practice his religion, but when the public gets involved in secular business dealings, his religion is not some get-out-of-jail-free card that exonerates his bigotry or his shady practices.

The lawsuits are about drawing a line, forcing businesses to address their acts of discrimination and drawing attention to the issue, not about getting some bigot in a God Hates Fags shirt to shoot photos at a gay wedding.

[–]StMichaeI [score hidden]

They are under no such obligation in any way, shape or form. I'm reminded of the quote "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." This man has the first amendment right to say he does not agree with gay weddings. He may lose business for it, he may be picketed for his beliefs, but it is his right. How then does he have any less protection to stand by his beliefs when they come to his actions and not just his words?

This ruling is the equivalent of the government stepping in and silencing him from legally protesting and forcing him to not only retract his statement, but support the other side. While the message being spread is one of tolerance, do the ends justify the means? Is the power to force someone to do something really a power we want anyone to have?

[–]repthe732 [score hidden]

Being gay is a protected class in CO, its like if he were to have refused to make cakes for black people

[–]StMichaeI [score hidden]

And how is refusing to make a cake for black people any different from him saying he hates black people because they steal things and have too many kids? I'd immediately think he's an asshole for doing either, but it doesn't give anyone the right to silence him any more than it gives them the right to force him to do business with someone he doesn't want to.

[–]stillclub [score hidden]

what if they were the only cake business in town? why did all those black people want to go into those white only bars?

[–]FasterThanTW -1 ポイント0 ポイント

it's literally like a 9 year old taking his basketball and going home because he missed a shot.

[–]schoocher 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Those comments...

|until there are no more babies to replace the dying queers and queens ...

Wow...

| Sean G. • 10 minutes ago

He should start an AIDS line of cakes, All Individuals Deserve Something because a certain protected citizens needs a certain cake. Could be big growth in his business. He can start a drive thru window to pick up the cake, one-way window of course.

I have no doubt these people consider themselves to be "good" Christians...

They want to be respected, except they're not respectable. Same sex degeneracy is shameful and so is the so called 'legal system' that persecuted these upright business owners. Good for them to stand up for what is right and not cave in to deviate bullying. As a contractor I will never do a construction project for a sexual deviate non matter what the circumstances. I don't have any 'gay friends' and I never will.

No wonder Gandhi thought so little of today's Christians:

|“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

[–]mushpuppy 1 ポイント2 ポイント

In time, if not already, this baker will be viewed as we today might view a baker from the 60s or earlier who refused to make a wedding cake for an African-American couple.

[–]ganymede_boy 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Agreed. Unfortunately, parts of the US lag well behind in supporting minority couples. For example, it was only November 1998 when South Carolina finally removed its constitutional ban on interracial marriage.

[–]Cardenjs 1 ポイント2 ポイント

I do have mixed feelings about this whole scenario. Now I'm fairly liberal and "I" wouldn't be compromising my beliefs in serving gays, but I don't know what it's like to be forced to compromise like that.

But this bakery I believe is the one who also makes cakes for solstice events and divorce celebrations, so he isn't hiding behind religion, hes just homophobic.

[–]zoidberg1339 [score hidden]

My question is, why would you sue someone who is such a bigot that they're turning down business? And do you really want them making your cake?

Man, I wouldn't want them to do shit for my wedding. I'd give my money to someone that isn't an asshole and move on with my life. Life's too shot to spend time in court with assholes over trivial matters.

[–]mushpuppy -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

I don't know what it's like to be forced to compromise like that.

I can tell you what it's like: it's like a caucasian being forced to compromise by making a wedding cake for a minority couple.

[–]Stlducks -5 ポイント-4 ポイント

Except minorities didn't choose their skin color.

[–]mushpuppy 0 ポイント1 ポイント

If you're serious, you've just disregarded the evidence that sexual orientation is at the very least heavily influenced by heredity.

[–]schoocher -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

BRILLIANT argument.

So I'm guessing that at some point you thought about having a homosexual relationship and chose to remain heterosexual instead?

[–]27th_wonder -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Hasn't everyone? When you use porn, you choose to focus on the opposite sex. You make a conscious choice about what to fap to.

When you watch Anal sex, do you go for 2 guys or a guy and a girl?

[–]schoocher 1 ポイント2 ポイント

I choose to focus on the opposite sex because I'm not attracted to the same sex. Never have been and I doubt, at this point, I ever will.

For me, it's not a conscious decision. It's not a choice. I get boners when I look at naked women, I don't get boners when I look at naked men. So when I hear these people who say that gays make a conscious choice, I can only wonder what kind of choices they are talking about. It makes me feel that there are some "heterosexuals" who aren't as hetero as they pretend to be and are constantly fighting the urge to "wander off" the "straight" path.

[–]FasterThanTW -1 ポイント0 ポイント

sorry to break it to you, but you're gay (or at least bi)

not that there's anything wrong with that, but it seems like something you'd be upset to find out.

[–]chicofaraby 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Bad decision making seems to be baked into this business.

[–]Uniqueuponme 0 ポイント1 ポイント

The comments on this article on the source page make me sick.

[–][deleted]

[deleted]

    [–]mushpuppy 0 ポイント1 ポイント

    Not sure why you guys are reproducing that idiocy here.

    [–]EnderVaped -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

    Because taking your ball and going home has always been the right answer.

    /s

    [–]holytouch 0 ポイント1 ポイント

    i cannot get worked up about this. the bakery owner will run himself out of business and another bakery will spring up to serve the demand. i cannot find any outrage in his refusal to bake a cake that somehow compromised his beliefs.

    [–]twistednipples -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

    I can't believe some of the comments here. I am all for gay marriage and free speech and all those good things but this guy still has a right to his opinion. He owns his own business, a private establishment, and should be able to refuse to serve anyone for any reason. Employment is a different issue, but for customers? I think it's wrong to force an opinion on anyone regardless of how stupid it is.

    [–]lwlinalw [score hidden]

    He can have all the opinions he wants, but "right to refuse" does not allow you to discriminate against a protected class (which homosexuals are in Colorado).

    In order for you to exercise right to refuse, there must be a legitimate business reason for doing so AND it cannot be directed towards a protected class.

    [–]twistednipples [score hidden]

    And I disagree with that. You are taking away rights from people just because they hold an opinion different from theirs.

    [–]repthe732 [score hidden]

    if you disagree with it, then don't set up a business in a state where the people you hate are a protected class

    [–]laddersdazed -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

    These folks dont want to serve the public.....they want a private club company.....hope they find one...

    [–]moe-hong -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

    Waaaaahhh, I'm taking my toys and going home because mommy says I have to share.

    Maybe he should have named his business "wedding cakes only for couples with one penis and one vagina"

    [–]Morris724 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

    Doesn't a private business have the right to refuse service to anyone?

    Edit: Are you people downvoting because you see this as an anti-gay remark or something? I also found out that certain states do not allow or limited this right.

    [–]stillclub [score hidden]

    so you dont remember that whole civil rights act thing?

    [–]Morris724 [score hidden]

    He is not a government entity.

    [–]BoldestKobold [score hidden]

    Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII.

    [–]Morris724 [score hidden]

    To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes.

    I don't see where someone is forced to make cakes. To violate someones civil rights it has to be some form of government entity. If the Cake shop was government run, or if they banned gay wedding cakes, then it could bee seen as such. This is a private business.

    [–]LunarChild [score hidden]

    In Arizona at least, we do. Lots of business' post signs reading "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"

    While I don't agree with the owners position on gay marriage, he has every right to have it, and if he doesn't want to supply his services to them because of it, that again is his right. This is not a government institution were talking about, it's a privately owned business, and the owner has every right to serve whom he pleases.

    I would personally call him out for being a homophobic asshole and simply take my business elsewhere, and support people whom also support my beliefs.

    [–]mikailtal -1 ポイント0 ポイント

    Not in America it doesnt. Enjoy the sweet taste of democracy!

    [–]Morris724 [score hidden]

    I guess not anymore.

    [–]mikailtal [score hidden]

    Not an american. But may I ask: how did it come about that you guys over there allowed yourselves to be bullied and brow beaten into submission by the LGBT crowd? I have in mind specifically this news article as well as the issue of firefox ceo Brendan Eich being forced to resign for contributing to a cause of his choice I mean wtf? Could someone please explain to me what is going on down there?

    [–]Morris724 [score hidden]

    Pandering to the lowest common denominator. I don't know when or why this started happening, but it does no good. People are (or should be) free to have a business. Say you open a book store, but don't sell religious material. You will be protested until you're forced to shut down. That is freedom and equality now. All of this babying and trying to make everyone feel good does not help anything. If a store wont make you a cake, move on to the next store. These peoples civil rights were not violated. If there was a law put into place saying "No gay wedding cakes." Then yes, their rights were violated. People don't understand this concept and they just get angry at people who voice a different opinion. They want to talk about rights being violated, this business owner had his rights violated, but he's a "bad guy" so it's ok. It's sad and disgusting.