Oregon bakery closes doors after state investigates over refusal to cater same-sex wedding

posted at 7:21 pm on September 3, 2013 by Allahpundit

A follow-up to the story of the New Mexico photographer who lost her court battle after refusing to take a job at a gay wedding. Different state and a different trade this time but a similar result potentially: The business owners in this case said no when a lesbian couple came into the shop looking for a wedding cake. The latter filed a complaint with the state under the relevant antidiscrimination law and an investigation, which could have taken up to a year, was launched. The bakers, having already been targeted for a boycott by opponents and likely fearing the expense and aggravation of a long court battle themselves, decided to close the shop and move operations into their home, which presumably renders the business “distinctly private” and therefore beyond the reach of the state’s public accommodations law. (Does it?)

Watch the extended interview with them about what they’ve gone through, paying special attention to the bit in the middle about “mafia tactics” by some gay-rights supporters. Two interesting wrinkles to this case vis-a-vis the New Mexico one. First, remember that Dale Carpenter and Eugene Volokh argued on the photographer’s behalf that, because photography is an art and inherently expressive, forcing her to cover an event to which she’s morally opposed necessarily violates her right of free expression. The same isn’t true, wrote Carpenter, of “more mundane and generic services (like cake-baking).” Presumably he’d agree with the gay couple, then, that the bakers have no right to refuse service. I’m not sure I grasp the distinction, though: In both cases, the business owners are being asked to celebrate an act to which they conscientiously object by producing a beautiful product in its honor. What’s more expressive, framing a shot of a married couple posing or crafting an elaborate cake to glorify the occasion? I’m not sure that there’s more artistry in photography in this case.

Second, note what the guy says in the clip about how they’ve made cakes for this couple before. They don’t refuse to serve gay customers, they refuse to serve gay weddings specifically. The same is true, I assume, of the New Mexico photographer. That’s a potential line of attack for social-conservative pols as they start to push back against cases like this — this isn’t a categorical refusal to serve a minority group, it’s a religious objection to serving at one particular type of event in which that group participates. That may not help them legally but it’ll help in the court of public opinion, where the majority in support of religious exemptions in situations like this is already overwhelming. I’d be surprised if we don’t start seeing legislative hearings about it, whether in Congress or at the state level, sometime next year.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Those tolerant liberals.

The Notorious G.O.P on September 3, 2013 at 7:24 PM

The Sodomite Taliban™

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 7:25 PM

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

They will never stop until their perverted choices are celebrated by all.

trs on September 3, 2013 at 7:27 PM

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

I’m not saying that I disagree – but you’ll get civil rights exploiters barking about “whites only” restaurants and some such….

Defenestratus on September 3, 2013 at 7:29 PM

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

It used to be that way but not anymore in Obama’s world. Just ask the photog that refused to photograph a gay wedding.

Actually you can still refuse service so long as the customer is a heterosexual white christian.

The Notorious G.O.P on September 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM

No Shirt

No Shoes

No Morals

No Service

HotAirian on September 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM

The government has no problem with you practicing your religious beliefs, just as long as you don’t PRACTICE your religious beliefs.

GarandFan on September 3, 2013 at 7:31 PM

Here comes JetBoy with a handful of poo to toss on the board… 4… 3… 2…

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Yep. Best wishes to the bakery, hopefully they get lots of orders!

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:32 PM

which presumably renders the business “distinctly private” and therefore beyond the reach of the state’s public accommodations law.

Doesn’t put it beyond the reach of peaceful protesters who will burn down the house with everyone in it in order to achieve equality and happiness for all.

The douchebag couple could have just found another bakery, but no, they had to do make it an enormous shiite pile of outrage.

Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Just take the job and do it poorly. Screw em.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 7:35 PM

Just take the job and do it poorly. Screw em.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 7:35 PM

Get paid up front. Then give them a bran muffin with two toothpicks on top.

besser tot als rot on September 3, 2013 at 7:37 PM

That may not help them legally but it’ll help in the court of public opinion, where the majority in support of religious exemptions in situations like this is already overwhelming. I’d be surprised if we don’t start seeing legislative hearings about it, whether in Congress or at the state level, sometime next year.

Stop gap. We have to fix this at some point.

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

^ That. It has to be true or we aren’t free to associate. The conception of business has to change back to what it really is, a part of a person’s life and under their moral direction. The “public accommodation” thought is artificial. If we have to draw a line between The Corporations™ and the vast numbers of private businesses, then lets start there.

Does anyone really believe a person has no right to refuse to work for someone? It doesn’t matter what’s written down; natural rights aren’t written down.

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:38 PM

The government has no problem with you practicing your religious beliefs, just as long as you don’t PRACTICE your religious beliefs. GarandFan on September 3, 2013 at 7:31 PM

You can believe whatever you want, so long as you don’t practice it.

“The Huguenins are free to think, to say, to believe, as they wish; they may pray to the God of their choice and follow those commandments in their personal lives wherever they lead. The Constitution protects the Huguenins in that respect and much more. But there is a price, one that we all have to pay somewhere in our civic life.

“In the smaller, more focused world of the marketplace, of commerce, of public accommodation, the Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different.”

All the usual suspects will be here shortly to try to turn this into an atheism thread.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Who is John Galt?

ritewhit on September 3, 2013 at 7:39 PM

On what basis did she refuse? Did they want two brides on the cake? Why not just bake the cake and leave off the topping? She had baked for them before.

ctmom on September 3, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Get paid up front. Then give them a bran muffin with two toothpicks on top.

besser tot als rot on September 3, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Funny, but as a Christian couple their hands are tied, they have an internal conviction to make a good cake.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Doesn’t put it beyond the reach of peaceful protesters who will burn down the house with everyone in it in order to achieve equality and happiness for all.

The douchebag couple could have just found another bakery, but no, they had to do make it an enormous shiite pile of outrage.

Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Stop the hate by any means necessary! Write any law necessary to force people to accept freedom!

Free Trayvon!

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

liberals are so controlling when they’re not worshiped.

patman77 on September 3, 2013 at 7:42 PM

Does anyone really believe a person has no right to refuse to work for someone? It doesn’t matter what’s written down; natural rights aren’t written down. Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Well they sort of are:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:42 PM

The douchebag couple could have just found another bakery, but no, they had to do make it an enormous shiite pile of outrage.
 
Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 7:34 PM

 
Stop the hate by any means necessary! Write any law necessary to force people to accept freedom!
 
Free Trayvon!
 
Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

 
NO JUSTINS!
 
NO PETES!

rogerb on September 3, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Funny, but as a Christian couple their hands are tied, they have an internal conviction to make a good cake. 22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Wow. Please give us a little Bible studyin’ on this.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:44 PM

The usual tolerance from the heterophobes…….I don’t understand why the lesbians wanted cake at their wedding….Don’t they prefer pie?

repvoter on September 3, 2013 at 7:44 PM

So, may a Jewish photographer refuse to work at a Christian wedding, or a Christian photographer refuse to work at a Jewish wedding?

Ira on September 3, 2013 at 7:47 PM

.Don’t they prefer pie?

repvoter on September 3, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Or throw some frosting on a piece of carpet and let them munch on that.

Flange on September 3, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Doesn’t put it beyond the reach of peaceful protesters who will burn down the house with everyone in it in order to achieve equality and happiness for all.

The douchebag couple could have just found another bakery, but no, they had to do make it an enormous shiite pile of outrage.

Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Stop the hate by any means necessary! Write any law necessary to force people to accept freedom!

Free Trayvon!

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Liberal hypocrisy is a redundant term, eh?

It’s what they do best worst.

OUTRAGE, BABY!!!

Hate in the name of love and liberty. If only they were “liberal” toward those whose views clash with theirs.

hillbillyjim on September 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM

Funny how as I grew up over the decades, the Progressives attacked Christianity on all fronts as a controlling, backwards, child-raping organization.

Now, these same Progressives want to use the traditional roles of religion, marriage, as their own and NOT A GOD D@MNED A ONE OF YA IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY MY DAY!!11!!

Of course, Global Gaianism is now the New Religion, that with its evil white male business owners starring a lead role as Satan, and its spawn is CO2.

jdubya on September 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM

well baking is an art, especially wedding cakes. they are definitely artistic!

but never mind that, i simply agree with this:

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

and there is the counter-argument, which is

I’m not saying that I disagree – but you’ll get civil rights exploiters barking about “whites only” restaurants and some such….

Defenestratus on September 3, 2013 at 7:29 PM

yeah that’s true. but the good news is that if someone actually did have a “whites only” restaurant, so many people would be angry about it that hardly anyone would eat there and the place would be forced to shut down because they’re not making enough money. so the gov’t won’t have to shut it down.

Sachiko on September 3, 2013 at 7:49 PM

What will take place if some straight group targets a gay owned business and uses mafia tactics and files suit?

docflash on September 3, 2013 at 7:49 PM

Wow. Please give us a little Bible studyin’ on this.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Colossians 3:23-24
Ecclesiastes 9:10

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

Religious freedom was never free, as the sign on their door suggests. It was always bought and paid for. The change is that the price is going up.

ted c on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

This is just what anti-Christians want. To force Christians to only be permitted to follow their faith in private and ban it from the public square. They don’t care who they destroy as long as they make it clear that only worshipping the state is permitted in public.

njrob on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

Under obama, “Freedom of Religion” only applies to members of non-religion cults, such as atheists and muslims.

Pork-Chop on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

So when does the Homo Brotherhood take to the streets marking christian homes and businesses with red paint for destruction?

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

“We really loved the raisin muffins! No hard feelings, right?”

-Right. No hard feelings. But those weren’t raisins, thanks for the business.

Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Just take the job and do it poorly. Screw em.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 7:35 PM

You still get sued.

RickB on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

So, why was it OK for a bakery in New Jersey to refuse to bake birthday cakes for Adolf Hitler Campbell and Aryan Nation Campbell?

Certainly, the owners could credibly and with reason cite religious grounds.

Will kosher delis now be forced to serve non-kosher food? Can I get a bacon and ham sammich at Abdullah’s Bar & Grille?

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Now personally, I think you should be able to serve whomever you want, but I would think if you wanted to work in the bakery industry, you would have to be pretty gay tolerant. Kind of like opening a gunstore if you don’t like rednecks. I think you have every right to do it, but it may not be the best marketing choice.

JamesB on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Who is John Galt?

ritewhit on September 3, 2013 at 7:39 PM

He’s the guy who owns Galt’s Gulch Bakery and Confectioners.

Stop by sometime. He makes a mean chocolate chip cookie.

turfmann on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

So could they make them make two cakes that look liked v@ginas?

These phuckers could then claim the bakery was sexist and homophobic.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 7:52 PM

I’m sorry but IMO a business has a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Cleombrotus on September 3, 2013 at 7:26 PM

I’m not saying that I disagree – but you’ll get civil rights exploiters barking about “whites only” restaurants and some such….

Defenestratus on September 3, 2013 at 7:29 PM

A “whites only” restaurant is stupid & immoral, but it ought to be legal.
Let the court of public opinion punish them, not the law.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 7:52 PM

MeanWhile………………………………….

Photo: LGBT supporters prepare to protest in from of Russian consular’s home in Seattle – @ElisaHahnK5

16 mins ago from twitter.com/ElisaHahnK5 by editor
======================================================

https://twitter.com/ElisaHahnK5/status/375037725969117184/photo/1

canopfor on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

Who is John Galt?

ritewhit on September 3, 2013 at 7:39 PM

He’s the guy who owns Galt’s Gulch Bakery and Confectioners.

Stop by sometime. He makes a mean chocolate chip cookie.

turfmann on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

The tiramisu is TO DIE FOR.

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

Second, note what the guy says in the clip about how they’ve made cakes for this couple before. They don’t refuse to serve gay customers, they refuse to serve gay weddings specifically.

that’s very interesting. it blows the “you hate gay customers” argument right out of the water! i don’t think liberals can even process this. people who don’t support gay marriage do not necessarily hate gays?? shocker!!

Sachiko on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

Im always astonished when I read these stories.

1. Isnt half the population in Oregon gay anyway? How do you manage to find not only a straight baker, but one who objects to gay marriage in friggin Oregon?

2. Arent the businesses concerned with weddings like photographers, wedding planners, florists, caterers and all that part of the creative industries and crawling with gay people?

I simply dont get how these kind of conflicts arise, unless the offended party is looking for trouble.

Valkyriepundit on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

What religious freedom? It’s not like they were baking cakes in a church service!

/Typical lib

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

You still get sued.

RickB on September 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Good luck with that slick.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

A “whites only” restaurant is stupid & immoral, but it ought to be legal…

…just as blacks only colleges, pageants, scholarships, etc, are stupid, immoral, & legal.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

Wow. Please give us a little Bible studyin’ on this.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Colossians 3:23-24
Ecclesiastes 9:10

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:50 PM

That’s not Bible study, it’s prooftexting.

So Christian photogs should go ahead and film some pornography, and do the best job they can…?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:54 PM

We are moving our bakery to an in-home bakery

Don’t worry, Christian, we’ll find you there too and continue our harassment.
/LGBT

ted c on September 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:42 PM

I can’t believe you are quoting hate speech right here in the open.

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM

That’s not Bible study, it’s prooftexting.

So Christian photogs should go ahead and film some pornography, and do the best job they can…?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:54 PM

No. What’s your point?

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM

They will never stop until their perverted choices are celebrated adopted by all.

trs on September 3, 2013 at 7:27 PM

ReWrite™ engaged for accuracy.

Steve Eggleston on September 3, 2013 at 7:56 PM

Remember when people were mocking the notion that same-sex marriage would lead inevitably to trying to use the government to force Christians to accept homosexuality?

After all, it’s not like there’s some sort of gay agenda. Nobody believes that kind of foolishness.

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Tolerance for thee but not for me – Militant homosexuals

God save us from ourselves and please bless this great, godly couple

sadsushi on September 3, 2013 at 7:57 PM

They’ve already begun persecuting Catholics in Europe for expressing similar sentiments. As usual, the liberals in Europe are just a few years ahead of the liberals in America, but at least we know what to expect.

cynccook on September 3, 2013 at 7:57 PM

So as a cracker, can I join the Black Panthers???

patman77 on September 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM

Shutting down your business sure beats the hell out of selling cakes to lesbians. The LORD shall not be mocked, for He sayeth that whosoever shall vend baked goods to homosexuals will burn for all eternity.

Armin Tamzarian on September 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM

The antitheist is here…have fun.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Shutting down your business sure beats the hell out of selling cakes to lesbians. The LORD shall not be mocked, for He sayeth that whosoever shall vend baked goods to homosexuals will burn for all eternity.

Armin Tamzarian on September 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM

It’s a matter of principle, and taking a stand for what you believe.

Probably why you don’t understand it.

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:01 PM

I’m not saying that I disagree – but you’ll get civil rights exploiters barking about “whites only” restaurants and some such….

Defenestratus on September 3, 2013 at 7:29 PM

And the market would decide. Those businesses would most likely go out of business.

Mimzey on September 3, 2013 at 8:01 PM

Churches are on the list too.

slickwillie2001 on September 3, 2013 at 8:02 PM

That’s not Bible study, it’s prooftexting.

So Christian photogs should go ahead and film some pornography, and do the best job they can…?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:54 PM

No. What’s your point?

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM

I think we’re all wondering what your point is, Rev. Spurgeon.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:02 PM

…just as blacks only colleges,

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 7:53 PM

I don’t think they’re really are such things. Whites can go to traditionally black colleges. A couple hundred whites probably go to Howard and 18 percent of those who go to Spelman are white.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Here comes JetBoy…

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Ain’t here.

I trust he’s not out looking for a Christian business to sue.

But that seems to be the wave that his allies in this debate are riding.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Shutting down your business sure beats the hell out of selling cakes to lesbians. The LORD shall not be mocked, for He sayeth that whosoever shall vend baked goods to homosexuals will burn for all eternity.

Armin Tamzarian on September 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM

Thats a made up bullshit argument.
You missed the point completely.

Mimzey on September 3, 2013 at 8:04 PM

Armin they really didn’t shut down their business. Too bad for you.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 8:04 PM

I think we’re all wondering what your point is, Rev. Spurgeon.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:02 PM

Reconcile the verses w/ any license to make a lousy product.

Go ahead, I’ll wait.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Here comes JetBoy…

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Ain’t here.

I trust he’s not out looking for a Christian business to sue.

But that seems to be the wave that his allies in this debate are riding.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM

He’s out trolling truckstop restrooms, but I’m sure that his Driod has an app that alarms him when gay threads appear on HA.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

So, may a Jewish photographer refuse to work at a Christian wedding, or a Christian photographer refuse to work at a Jewish wedding?

Ira on September 3, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Of course. Why not?

Mimzey on September 3, 2013 at 8:06 PM

So, may a Jewish photographer refuse to work at a Christian wedding, or a Christian photographer refuse to work at a Jewish wedding?

Ira on September 3, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Why shouldn’t they be allowed to decline those engagements?

blink on September 3, 2013 at 8:01 PM

Another good question: would a Christian couple wanting to get married sue a Jewish photographer who only worked Jewish weddings? I can’t see that happening.

Reverse the religions, and I think it’s still true. I can’t imagine a Jewish couple suing a photographer who only does Christian weddings.

But the comparison isn’t all that useful. While I suppose a photographer might only do Christian weddings, or only Jewish weddings, it’s hard to imagine that the photographer would actually be objecting to Jews getting married, or to Christians getting married.

It’s also hard to imagine a photographer objecting to photographing a wedding because the bride or the groom is homosexual, or rumored to be homosexual.

The only objection I can imagine is specifically to an unnatural marriage between two men or two women.

Hypothetically, I suppose a photographer could object to doing weddings for known polygamists….

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

Things like this surely must annoy the blazes out of liberals. Moving the bakery to their home puts them out of reach of the Left, and liberals can’t stand being thwarted.

Liam on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

Armin Tamzarian on September 3, 2013 at 7:58 PM

Oh look – f*cking moron is being a f*cking moron. *yawn*

Midas on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

Reconcile the verses w/ any license to make a lousy product.

Go ahead, I’ll wait.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Ephesians 5:12, “For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.”

But we can bake cakes for their “weddings,” which precede what they do in secret by six hours?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

So, may a Jewish photographer refuse to work at a Christian wedding, or a Christian photographer refuse to work at a Jewish wedding?

Ira on September 3, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Would you compel, under penalty of law, a christian or jewish photographer to photograph a mohammedian wedding?

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

precede what they do in secret by six hours

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

Get real. :)

– Or show me the gay couple that “waited.”

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 8:09 PM

CW on September 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Point well taken.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Ephesians 5:12, “For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.”

But we can bake cakes for their “weddings,” which precede what they do in secret by six hours?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

You’re losing me. I never said they must bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. I just said that they must not do what besser suggested.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:10 PM

precede what they do in secret by six hours

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

Get real. :)

– Or show me the gay couple that “waited.”

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Ok, sandwiched between their secret evil, eighteen hours after and six hours before.

22044 thinks that Shadrak,, Mechask, and Abendnego (Hannaniah, Azariah, and Michael) should have worshiped the idol with all their hearts.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Abortion is legal, but I wouldn’t sell a cake, or take photos of the wedding of an abortionist – should I have to?

If a gay caterer declined to cater a wedding of a Christian couple, or someone known to be overtly anti-gay – should they have to even if they don’t want to?

Should an anti-war photographer that is convinced Dubya is a war criminal have to accept the job of photographing Dubya’s next birthday celebration if they don’t want to?

C’mon, lefties – you know who you hate – picture yourself required not only to offer your services to that person/group you loathe, but you damn well better do a good f*cking job in the process, or the weight of the state would be brought to bear against you. This is what you want, right?

Just curious.

Midas on September 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Reverse the religions, and I think it’s still true. I can’t imagine a Jewish couple suing a photographer who only does Christian weddings.

Wrong! (One)Jewish couple sued our high school district because the valedictorian mentioned the name of Jesus Christ at the graduation ceremony……They were offended……..

repvoter on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

You’re losing me. I never said they must bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. I just said that they must not do what besser suggested. 22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:10 PM

By your logic, Hushai was a liar.

Look it up.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

That’s not Bible study, it’s prooftexting.

So Christian photogs should go ahead and film some pornography, and do the best job they can…?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 7:54 PM

No. What’s your point?

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:55 PM

I think we’re all wondering what your point is, Rev. Spurgeon.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:02 PM

As a Christian, he’s under no obligation to take the job, but if he takes it, he is obliged to do a good job rather than a deliberately lousy job?

Normally, I would agree with that statement. But, in this case, if they’re trying to use your commitment to doing a good job against you by trying to pressure you into accepting a job you don’t agree with, then it’s their own fault if they don’t like the result.

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

Ok, sandwiched between their secret evil, eighteen hours after and six hours before.

22044 thinks that Shadrak,, Mechask, and Abendnego (Hannaniah, Azariah, and Michael) should have worshiped the idol with all their hearts.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Uhhh…no I didn’t. Read my response to besser again.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

He’s out trolling truckstop restrooms, but I’m sure that his Driod has an app that alarms him when gay threads appear on HA.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

By stereotyping homosexuals, you’re making it a little easier for the Left to stereotype us, my friend.
For all I know, he may be abstinent.
I hope so, for his sake.

itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 8:15 PM

As a Christian, he’s under no obligation to take the job, but if he takes it, he is obliged to do a good job rather than a deliberately lousy job?

Normally, I would agree with that statement. But, in this case, if they’re trying to use your commitment to doing a good job against you by trying to pressure you into accepting a job you don’t agree with, then it’s their own fault if they don’t like the result.

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

Yes – if he takes the job, he must do the job well.

And he may refuse the job with no obligation or pressure.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:15 PM

By your logic, Hushai was a liar.

Look it up.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

I have no idea who Hushai is. Please explain.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM

The Sodomite Taliban™

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Jaibones on September 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

As a Christian, he’s under no obligation to take the job, but if he takes it, he is obliged to do a good job rather than a deliberately lousy job? There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

But if he takes the job, he’s not a Christian, so there are no Christian obligations that inhere.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

By stereotyping homosexuals, you’re making it a little easier for the Left to stereotype us, my friend. For all I know, he may be abstinent. I hope so, for his sake. itsnotaboutme on September 3, 2013 at 8:15 PM

He brags about his promiscuity.

Are you new here?

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM

22044 thinks that Shadrak,, Mechask, and Abendnego (Hannaniah, Azariah, and Michael) should have worshiped the idol with all their hearts.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

lol — that’s silly. I don’t know what you guys are arguing about. :) 22044 absolutely said no such thing.

I don’t think God’s going to throw anyone into Hell for flicking booger onto a cupcake — but it isn’t exactly Christian behavior.

But — not my business. You guys need the ceremonial pistols, I’ll go get ‘em.

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM

Reverse the religions, and I think it’s still true. I can’t imagine a Jewish couple suing a photographer who only does Christian weddings.

Wrong! (One)Jewish couple sued our high school district because the valedictorian mentioned the name of Jesus Christ at the graduation ceremony……They were offended……..

repvoter on September 3, 2013 at 8:13 PM

That’s disturbing, though fortunately rare. Still, a graduation ceremony at a public high school which SCOTUS foolishly thinks is a federal institution that has to be purely neutral on religious matters is not the same scenario as a private wedding that is clearly NOT a government institution, and can be religious or not as the couple wish.

There Goes the Neighborhood on September 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM

You guys need the ceremonial pistols, I’ll go get ‘em.

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM

*makes the popcorn*

Midas on September 3, 2013 at 8:19 PM

But if he takes the job, he’s not a Christian, so there are no Christian obligations that inhere.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

So it is a matter of salvation whether or not a christian does due diligence into the sexual orientation of all potential clients?

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 8:19 PM

But if he takes the job, he’s not a Christian, so there are no Christian obligations that inhere.

Akzed on September 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

Ahhh…this is helpful for me. Nothing further!

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Funny, but as a Christian couple their hands are tied, they have an internal conviction to make a good cake.

22044 on September 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Well, they could refuse to charge them more than $1. And then, give them the bran muffin with two toothpicks on top.

besser tot als rot on September 3, 2013 at 8:22 PM

The perfect answer.

CW on September 3, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3