Comments

  1. Bill says

    @Goodcarver: straight people might not go into it either, once the DA gets through with him.

    His only legal options, if those are his beliefs, are to get into a different line of work or not do wedding cakes at all. Instead, this slimy guy wants to ignore the law to line his own pocket with wedding-cake sales he does not deserve.

  2. Syrax says

    I thought the bible had something to say about tattoos. I’d also like to know how much would be the price of his kids, if I ever feel like buying one of them.

  3. jjose712 says

    Goodcarver: Of course not.
    Maybe if he lose some money he will learn to separate his personal beliefs of his business.

    And egiptians, greeks and romans marry centuries before Jesus. So there’s no way that marriage is a religious institution, at least not a christian one.

    Some people seem unable to separate religious marriage of civil marriage

  4. terry says

    the only way to deal with bigots is to sue their asses off. The bible encourages slavery so does he have the right to own others or not sell to mixed race couples? The ability to discriminate is not a protected right.

  5. NE Rich says

    In these cases I always am reminded of a great line from Pink Flamingos, there are two kinds of people in this world, my kind of people and assholes. I mean this guy is a biblical literalist great, I wonder how his Aramaic and Hebrew interpretation skills are? Same old same old, we’ll claim outrage, the right will claim victimhood (hiding behind his children to justify his stupidity) and the courts will act and everyone hates everyone. Sad state of affairs.

  6. David says

    Another foolish business owner that thinks it’s okay to discriminate against GBLT because of their religious view point. Fine. Looking forward to the article about his bakery closing due to lack of business. :)

  7. BETTY says

    So, do they sell cakes to people who have been divorced and are re-marrying? What about couples who have had pre-marital sex? Couples who may be expecting before they are married? Inter-racial and inter-religious couples? How about birthday cakes for children whose parent’s aren’t married?

    I love these religious people who want to take us back to “traditional marriage”. Like in bible times when they had multiple wives, where women were considered property and a dowry was involved? Or when there were arranged marriages? These are probably the same people who insist on leaving the “promise to obey your husband” part in the wedding vows.

    How about just leaving the judging to God, not a cakemaker.

  8. TominLA says

    Oregon includes sexual orientation in it’s discrimination laws. Wouldn’t a bakery refusing a type of goods or services to a protected category of persons be discrimination in public accommodation?

  9. rf7777 says

    It’s a frickin’ cake! Why ruin your business over a cake?! These people should be out of business not because of intolerance or bigotry but because of stupidity. If they don’t believe in same sex unions, fine. They don’t have to have one. They don’t have to go to one. But it’s a frickin’ cake! Do they really think their god is so mean, angry and spiteful that he will smite them or cast them into the lake of fire for baking a frickin’ cake?

  10. says

    I remain so unimpressed with people who are only Christians as an excuse to hate gays. Or Muslims.

    Do these folks have issues with cakes made for marriages of differing, or no, religious affiliation?

    i wonder if he’s even stopped to wonder if either of his kids may be gay, and what potential message of hatred he’s harming them with….

    unlikely.

    oh well. get on yahoo. yelp. yellowpages. write heinously bad reviews. drive the f***er out of business.

  11. e.c. says

    I’m curious, does he sell cakes to people on their second (or third or fourth) marriages? Does he sell cakes to non-Christians? How strict is he about his “you’re violating the bible so I can’t sell you my crappy baked goods” policy. Seems to me he should have the Ten Commandments posted at the door just for starters and we’ll see how many customers he still has.

  12. says

    My, my.
    Now religion is being used as a basis for refusing to bake a cake !

    And this clown is standing on a principle; that principle is that God would not want him baking cakes for lesbians who want to get married.
    What about lesbians generally ? Would they get a cake ?
    And adulterers ? And fornicators ? And bigamists ? And shell fish eaters ? And nasty women who disobey their husbands ? Or infidels ? Or Islamics ? Or the French ?

    What a great stand for God and Jesus and righteousness, dude. The world really needs men of principle, like you.

  13. MikeH says

    He’s kinda cute isn’t he… that said, I’m not buying it… this seems like a publicity stunt more than anything else. I mean, come on… The wingnuts will wave their hands and cry religious discrimination… meh! The law is clear, he’ll have to sell the cake or stop baking them… would like to see a pix of him with his shirt off though…

  14. AnonaGay says

    It’s just a cake. He doesn’t strike me as particularly malicious.

    Once he sees it as really just a case of “render unto Caesar”, his religious convictions won’t be compromised, and everybody’ll be happy.

    I just can’t get excited or upset about this, or think this guy is an example of what the core problems are. We have far worse enemies that will never be assuaged.

  15. rf7777 says

    Funny. These bigot cakemakers on their website’s recommendations page list The Ainsworth House for wedding venues. The Ainsworth House is gay owned and operated and (of course) hosts same sex weddings/unions.

  16. Bernie says

    another religious zealot who has the audacity to say “I don’t hate gays” just because I discriminate against them….and by the way who made you the judge of others….the true meaning of Christianity is loving others and not judging them just as Jesus had done….and when this brainiac hater goes out of business, who does he blame??!!?!??!

  17. Cake Cutter says

    What’s with the earring? Every good bible-bearing baptist bigot knows that when it comes to earrings left is right, but right is wrong.

    And this dude works in a business with pink walls, and does WOMAN’s work? What kind of example is that setting for his kids?

    Man up, sweetcakes.

  18. Tom in Long Beach says

    I agree with KUMICU how ironic someone who works in a pink shop will not bake a wedding cake for a same sex couple. People are so irrational about this. There are elevated tour guides on the preserved ship where I work called ships officers. Some have gotten “ordained” to preform weddings. One of them I know that is an otherwise nice guy did not get ordained because he might have to marry a same sex couple if/when Prop 8 finally goes into the dustbin.

  19. will says

    There will also be bigots just as there are racists. We should NOT go after every small business that does not agree and comply with our agenda. If they have strong “Christian beliefs” they are entitled to them. Bringing the state or federal law to force a small privately owned business to bake and decorate a lesbian cake is petty. Our vengeance is showing. I hate the Westboro Baptist Church, but the SCOTUS clearly said they have a constitutional right to do what they’re doing. We shouldn’t try to do away with the first amendment when it suits our purposes and then invoke it when it also suits our purposes. As attitudes continue to change, they will too or risk going out of business.

  20. johnny says

    THE BEST PART:

    This news item falls into place on a Sunday in winter, when EVERYONE in the blogosphere has time on their hands to go to work and put these fools and lawbreakers into the limelight for their hatred.

    Idiots.

  21. says

    Will, you need to invest in a functioning spine as soon as possible.

    Seriously. That’s one of the most cowardly “Hi, I’m a doormat” posts I’ve read in a while.

    They don’t have strong Christian beliefs. They have only strong anti-gay beliefs. And they never get challenged when wimps give excuses for not challenging them.

    Spine. Invest in one.

  22. says

    for real – post bad reviews. and not just anti-gay ones. post negative reviews of their products and services. drive them out of business.

    clearly, they’d rather go broke than contribute to…uh…gays eating dessert. or something.

    so let’s help them out.

  23. kp05 says

    I love this! It seems all these unhealthy places, like Papa John’s, Chick-fil-A, and a handful of bakeries are so outspoken with their anti-gay or anti-Democratic views, they become a bigoted pit-stop for the conservative right, fattening our enemies (yikes, Twinkie Defense!) and eventually sealing their own demise.

    Sure, the quick pick-up in sales will be well-received. The owner will think he did something right. And then Fox News will drop the story and he’ll be left wondering where all the business went. Fan-freakin-tastic.

  24. JohnAGJ says

    @Will: That’s because WBC is a church while Sweet Cakes is a business. They both fall under completely different sections of the law and constitutional protections.

  25. will says

    If a gay-owned bakery refused to bake a homophobic cake for Tony Perkins of the FRC (research! hah!) that said “Marriage is between one man and one woman” — would we all be clamoring to sue the gay bakery if they refused to make it? Gay marriage will be accepted as normal within a few years, even in conservative states. I believe that. Let’s not harrass a small business for refusing to bake a lesbian cake.

  26. Lars says

    @Will: Feel free to ignore the ad hominem attacks rampant here. You advocate a tactical position that is perfectly valid and worthy of elevated debate. While I think legal recourse in this instance is justified, I am happy that I can disagree with you without resorting to acrimonious attacks regarding your anatomy.

  27. says

    Will, your hypothetical “what-if” exists in a vacuum.

    you compare a lesbian couple getting a wedding cake to a designated hate-group…uh…asking a gay business to bake them a cake.. riiiiiight. RIIIIGHHTTT…..

    you also referenced the amorphous “Gay Agenda” in your first comment. Care to specifically elaborate what that “Agenda” is?

    let’s not harass a small business? cowardice.

    put them OUT of business.

  28. Lars says

    As Barney Frank beautifully put it, our agenda is:

    “to be protected against violent crimes driven by bigotry, it’s to be able to get married, it’s to be able to get a job, and it’s to be able to fight for our country.”

    Will’s comment did not reference anything amorphous. It pertained directly to the second point in Frank’s list.

  29. will says

    I thought we all knew what our gay agenda is: equal rights under the law. There are exemptions for churches in most marriage equality states for performing gay marriages. This non-gay-cake-baking bakery doesn’t strike me as an act of spiteful vengeance. He believes in his cause just as we believe in ours. As long as nobody hurts each other and we live and let live, he should be allowed to refuse service if it conflicts with his deepest beliefs(like non-gay marrying churches). Imposing our will on others is ugly.

    All I’m saying, really, is let’s not take out our own spite on average homophobic mom and pop shops with their own beliefs, however much we disagree. We have bigger fish to fry.

  30. Rich says

    The upshot of this case may well define – for Oregon law at any rate – what the limits of “public accommodation” are. For that purpose, the religious basis of the baker’s objections are irrelevant. If the baker had a sheet cake in his counter and the couple wanted to buy it, the baker would have no defense. Once they asked him to customize it, we wander into a gray area. Wedding cakes are often topped with miniature figurines representing the people who are getting married. If all the baker had were figurines showing a bride and a groom, can the baker be required to purchase one depicting a same-sex couple should the clients want one? I’m not sure, and it will be interesting to see how the courts sort this out, should it get to them.

  31. says

    equal rights under the law isn’t *my* agenda. it’s only the first step toward the real end goal: the elimination of a culture predisposed to bigotry and prejudice.

    and that doesn’t happen when we act like doormats when we’re being discriminated against.

    duh.

    he doesn’t believe in his cause at all. he’s just a bigot. it has nothing to do with his religious faith – his religious is the excuse he’s giving, not the actual reason for it.

    “Imposing our will on others is ugly.”

    Were you raised by southern racists who still feel bitter about being forced to Integrate, and live side-by-side with “colored folks”?

    Is anti-gay bigotry the only thing that you cower before or so you take a similarly-doormat-esque stance to racial bigotry and anti-Semitism?

    he’s not a church.

    would you also think it’s fair for a cashier to deny selling condoms to someone, because the cashier has “anti-condom religious beliefs?”

    how about public servants, whose duty it is to serve the public, no matter whom “the public” is?

    would you have the same stance if this man refused to bake a cake for a Jewish couple?

    to see how far-reaching anti-gay prejudice is look no further than your own mirror: look at what it’s reduced you to; being intellectually dishonest in order to not have to actively work against bigotry.

  32. jjose712 says

    will; you can’t be discriminate at a busines for your race or your sexual orientation. It’s as simple as that.

    This guy seems unable to understand that he needs to put his beliefs out of his business because not all the people going to his business share his beliefs.

    If he goes to another business and they refuse to serve him because he is a christian he would be angry for being discriminated, and he will be right. This is exactly the same case

  33. Steve says

    The “public accommodations” provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, is very specific. Title II prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations. A baker (seller of food) may not refuse to sell to anyone on the basis of those classifications.

    Unfortunately, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is not (yet) prohibited. Unless there is a state or local statute, the baker is within his rights to refuse to sell the cake.

    One step at a time. First, we get the right to get married. Then, we work on getting the right to buy a wedding case.

  34. will says

    By most of the logic here, every church in America should be sued in states that have gay marriage if they refuse to perform services. We are not so vindictive as to demand by law that every single Christian church marry us. Or do some of you believe that?

    This baker, no matter how you personally feel about his faith, is the church that will not perform a gay wedding. Exemptions in law should apply to conscientious objectors, so to speak.

    I personally believe that the Book of Leviticus, in certain verses, is a horrible anti-gay tract. But I do not believe I have the right to stop publishers by law from publishing it and sue them for discriminatory language. We simply can’t steamroll our deepest beliefs over others’ deepest beliefs. Some anti-gay evangelical Christians just want us to meet them halfway.

  35. Lars says

    @Steve: you are correct that it is not a violation of federal law, but that’s not the issue here. What is being investigated is whether they have violated Oregon state law.

  36. daws says

    Well, that’s disgusting. The great thing though is people can protest with their wallets. If he gets less customers as a result of this and it hurts his business, then great. Other bakeries that don’t discriminate would love the business.

    I wonder what happens when you violate a discrimination law like that. Do they get fined or something?

  37. hyperviper says

    Good for him! Hooray for someone that has the courage to stand up for what is morally right! It’s not his fault that these 2 women have chosen to live an immoral lifestylke (and yes, it IS a choice).

  38. says

    You can not compare this situation to the operation of a church. A church is a religious entity by definition. A business is licensed by the state, and therefore is subject to state laws. No religious exemptions apply. You can not discriminate against a minority class recognized by law. Oregon state law includes sexual orientation. So if you serve a 5-time divorced father of 6 illegitimate children because he is a xtian, you have to serve everyone.

  39. RWG says

    . “I believe that marriage is a religious institution ordained by God,” said Klein.”

    And yet, he had to get a license from the State of Oregon for his marriage to mean anything at all. It just shows how little religion actually has to do with the institution. Hypocrite!

  40. TooBoot says

    I don’t mind these religious bigots makng cakes but I just wish they would keep their beliefs to themselves and stop trying to cram it down our throats. I mean, I’ll talk to them and I’ll even buy something from them, but do I really need to know about their delusional thinking? Keep that to yourself! It’s disgusting!

  41. Mary says

    It’s a sign of how my thinking has changed on gay rights issues that I no longer have much sympathy for people like this baker. However, I’ll still caution equality advocates to not legally hound people like him. It is going to take time for everyone in the culture to get used to gay equality -s lawsuit against people for refusing to help provide services for gay weddings is rubbing salt in the wound. My concern is pragmatic – we don’t want the equality cause to suffer a backlash for what ordinary Americans who are lukewarm about gay rights may view as “going too far.” We have seen from the past year that momentum is quickly shifting to the pro-gay side. People on the losing side can often inspire sympathy since we all know what its like to lose a political cause.

    However, philosophically, this baker has no case – and shouldn’t have one. The law is the law. If sexual orientation is protected from discrimination in Oregon law then he has to serve gay customers and can’t refuse to because he dislikes where social policy is going on gay issues. Religious freedom is important, but it can’t extend to claiming religious exemptions for every law you don’t want to obey. Otherwise law has no meaning. In time most bakers like this will either come around to the pro-equality position or find another line of work. Already there are many who are quietly joining the 21st century on this issue and preparing for the day when they have to deal with the reality of gay weddings (reception hall owners, hotel owners, bakers, dress seller,etc…) Ideally, we want this transition to be as smooth as possible

  42. andrew says

    If he is telling the truth when he says he sells item from his store to gay people every day, the way to deal with this bible believing bigot is simple: All the LGBT people and their relatives and friends should stop buying any “items” from his bakery. Show him that bigotry has consequences.

  43. will says

    Nice comment by steve. Oregon does not recognize same-sex marriages nor civil unions. Their state Constitution reads marriage is between one man and one woman via a 2004 voter referendum (2004 is a lifetime ago re: marriage equality). It does recognize domestic partnerships with no ceremonial requirement. A lesbian couple demanding a gay wedding cake from an anti-gay baker in a state that denies legal recognition of civil marriage is a bit of an anomaly. I’m fairly sure Oregon has the votes to pass a gay marriage bill now. Get the right to get married now and THEN worry about the right to the cake and the bringing of a lawsuit afterward. In the meantime, find a gay-friendly baker and stop giving yourself headaches.

  44. RMR says

    Oh Mary, shove a few cupcakes in your mouth and just shut the f**k up. I don’t care “how (your) thinking has changed on gay rights” when all you ever do is Tut-Tut about going easy on “ordinary Americans” and be gentle with them as they supposedly slowly warm to the idea of full gay equality. Every one of your comments comes with a condescending wag or your finger and an extra large dose of your obvious hetero-centric sense of entitlement. Some of us have been fighting for decades for LGBTQ rights and don’t need to hear your noise every chance you get.

  45. Hue-Man says

    This baker’s position is no different from the Boys Scouts’ nor from any employer who fires an employee because they’re gay. There is no biblical prohibition against gay wedding cakes just like there is none for gays learning how to start a campfire or for gay employees doing the work assigned to them.

    The issue here may seem symbolic or inconsequential but it’s representative of a broader issue, arising from various religious sects and cults demanding sweeping religious protections: is the USA going to be a nation of civil laws or a nation of contradictory religious fiat?

  46. Avery St.Clair says

    I don’t believe in bakers, at least not those who hope their kids will respect their dad for refusing to bake a frikkin CAKE for two people in love. Suppose this guy ever donates blood? Teaches the illiterate? Comforts the poor? Feeds the starving? Oh, but it’s OK for him to be self-righteous about someone else’s FROSTING, sure. You couldn’t make it up.

  47. Markus says

    Actually, Oregon does not include sexual orientation in anti discrimination law. I live in Oregon and remember what happened a few years back when the legislature tried to pass that. What happened was the overwhelming majority democrats in the legislature wanted to add gays to the anti discrimination laws mostly to promote hate crimes law. But you must remember that 90% of Oregon is practically empty, the Portland metro is 90% of the population and it is democratic. The rest of Oregon is as red state as Arkansas.

    So when they tried to get this passed the GOP blocked it and threatened all kinds of problems as usual. The compromise was that the democrats could have their anti discrimination clause based on sexual orientation as long as they dropped the word orientation. So, the law actually reads that you cannot discriminate based on sex. It is legally meaningless. Add to that the hate crimes legislation which was signed has NEVER been invoked except for one black guy that was harmed because he was black.

    In this county, the largest outside of Portland metro and as red state as they come, there was a double murder of two lesbian community activists and the cops got the guy, and it has since come out over the years that the women were targeted because of their sexuality, but the cops called it a burglary gone bad.

    I think when we talk about getting equality in law and rights in public accommodations we just are too late, America is going down like the Titanic and gay marriage is just rearranging the deck chairs while the staterooms fill with cold seawater.

  48. Chevytexas says

    I agree that, like discrimination in the past, business will punish this appropriately. As will those embarassed children he thinks he’s impressing.

  49. Caliban says

    Ohhhhh, he lets gay people buy things! How very big of him!

    Anyone who shops there is a fool. Get the word out and see how well his little hate-cakes sell then.

  50. says

    so far, the business is being flooded with bad reviews. now all that needs to happen is for a competitive company to go out of its way to be “Inclusive to All” and thus take all the business!

    YAY!

    boycotts work, folks.

    won’t bake a cake for a gay couple? enjoy a future on foodstamps. just kidding. his anti-gay @ss probably doesn’t want to contribute to nanny-state welfare living. so he can anticipate dumpster diving instead.

    and can explain to his kids that they had to (re)mortgage the house and sell the business because “Daddy would rather we all starve than bake a cake for lesbians”

  51. Mary says

    OK,RMR, let’s just give NOM exactly what it wants – a new focus. Once it gives up on fighting marriage equality it will switch to being, in essence, The National Organization for Traditional Marriage. It then aims to protect everyone who it claims is being forced to “condone” gay weddings by being a part of them. This is when public opinion starts to slow down and gay progress comes to a halt. Want to risk this? I still claim it’s foolish to risk it. Don’t we have dozens of states with state constitutions that still have to be overturned before SSM can become legal everywhere? All I’m saying is think about priorites. Hate my guts all you want. But don’t do what will harm gay couples whose lives are still vulnerable.

  52. will says

    Damn. I never realized how conservative Oregon state law is for a west coast state. Sexual orientation not covered under the anti-discrimination statute? No civil unions? The gay community there has MUCH bigger problems than getting a gay baker to decorate a cake. That’s a luxury compared to the freaking basics. This is 2013! Vote on marriage equality again and get the damn thing passed. At least change laws before you start harrassing a baker for refusing you a cake in a state denying your basic rights. Laws first. Go a sympathetic baker for your symbolic cake. Change the freaking laws. The time is ripe.

  53. says

    as an actual gay person who’s actually been Out for years and has actually lived and breathed and seen and BEEN the change that needs to happen, here’s the deal: progress and change don’t come when you let people walk all over you.

    this case has nothing whatsoever to do with “legalized gay marriage”

    because making a cake has no religious rites tied to it whatsoever, unless they sprinkle some of Jesus’ mutherf***ing blood into the batter, or some ritualistic nonsense.

    they have a business. of making cakes. and just decided that they have a religious obligation (despite their being nothing in any translation of the bible to back it up) to making a cake that will be consumed by the guests at a wedding between two lesbians.

    what will continue to harm gay couples and gay individuals is a culture that refuses to stand up against bigotry and discrimination.

  54. Bill says

    @HYPOCRITE SAYS WHAT: If he has to talk to the DA first for violating non-discrimination laws, his “I’ll talk to them” will be “Mister, can you spare some change?”

  55. Bill says

    @jaragon: we can “respect his rights to express his views,” by recognizing that he has a right to write a letter to the editor expressing those views. When he obtained a business license, however, he assumed along with it an obligation to follow the business laws of the state he is in, and in Oregon, those laws forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. If his views are not compatible with the law, he can either keep his views out of his place of business or choose some other line of work where the issue will not come up.

  56. Mary says

    Kiwi is right that the lesbian couple is harmed (to an extent) by the baker’s refusal to make their cake. However, if incidents like this become widespread and the public starts to see gays as pushy and demanding of validation by everyone rather than equality, gay couples of the future are MORE harmed.

    The analogies between racist and sexist laws of yesteryear ARE valid, and prove my point. Yes, those laws needed to be changed. And no, we wouldn’t tolerate a bakery that refused to serve a woman or an Afrian-American. But both the feminist movement and the civil rights movement made operational mistakes that they paid dearly for over a long period of time. Mistakes that made their goals harder to achieve. The gay rights movement should learn from these mistakes.

    Short version of the argument!

  57. Bill says

    @Markus: you must be out of date on Oregon law. http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/659a.html contains the relevant laws and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is clearly forbidden. There is an oversight – it does not forbid discrimination on the basis of perceived sexual orientation: you might be able to discriminate against a guy for thinking he is gay when he is actually straight.

    The version I cited is from 2011, so it may be more recent than what you remember.

  58. will says

    I used to hate the idea that voters could go to the voting booth and, essentially, vote on a persons life (by either denying or approving gay marriage). Now that the momentum had finally shifted in our favor, I do not want the SCOTUS to vote marriage equality in everywhere. I hope they keep a narrow focus on California. It feels great to change hearts and minds and have that reflected at the ballot box. We have problems to this day because SCOTUS made a sweeping judgement in “Roe v. Wade”, and we never hear the end about judicial activism and illegitimate law. The voters in Maryland, Washington, and Maine have legitimized our cause and because of that conservative views have shifted. We should let the states continue to vote via public referendum. If SCOTUS votes to legalize gay marriages in all states this June, I will not be disappointed, but the backlash against us will continue for decades, just like “Roe”. If voters continue to approve marraige equality — and they will — then it’s really US doing the work and taking deserved credit instead of a Court mandate.

  59. Tanoka says

    I’m reminded of the movie about Harvey Milk, and how he dealt with a homophobic shop owner. He had lots of gay people crowd the bigot’s shop, to make a point about how gays have money too, and he’d be a fool to say no to the business.

    I have no idea how close that was to the reality, but it would be fun if it was done to this a-hole.

  60. ***** says

    @Will, in what century do you foresee all this goodwill being applied to the lives of gay citizens? Equal protection under the law has been a promise for more than 140 years. Do we have to wait for another 140 years for public opinion to catch up with the Supreme Law of the Land?

  61. Bill says

    @Tanoka: in the Milk film, the homophobic shop owner was in the Castro, at a point when a lot of gays were moving in there. Apparently they set up a list of gay-friendly shops and just patronized those, which forced the others out of business or got them to change their ways as they saw the guy next door getting all the business.

  62. DALE says

    They have been erasing all negative postings on their FB page. They are only keeping the supportive comments from their religious friends.

    The hypocrisy of this guy. Picking and choosing what bible quotes to live by. I hope Mr. Tattoo and piercings knows he is in violation of his book:

    Leviticus 19:28 “Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD.”

  63. David Hearne says

    It’s discouraging that so many of you have so little respect for the basic civil rights of all people. One of the big ones is the right to Freedom Of Association and Freedom Of Speech. If I own a sign business, I should not have to print the signs for an anti-gay group. And it’s truly sad that an anti-gay group is more likely to respect my freedom of association than the so-called “progressives” and gay people.

    The extension of your position is that these people should be forced to make a cake that they don’t want to make. That’s slavery. The fact that they would be paid doesn’t alter the fact that it’s slavery, even slaves got payment in kind and many got allowances. They were still slaves.

    Grow up people. And read the god damned Constitution.

  64. BETTY says

    Take it down a notch David. It is not slavery. The problem here is hypocrisy. If you are going to claim it is against your bible or your religion then be consistent:

    Do not sell to people who have been divorced and are on their second or third wedding.

    Do not sell to people who eat pork and shellfish.

    Do not sell to those who have lived together in sin before getting married.

    Do not sell to those who wear garments of mixed fabrics.

    Do not sell to those who have are knocked up before getting married.

    Do not sell to those who don’t honor their mother of father.

    Don’t say you will sell to a gay person a cake or a cupcake any other time, but just not a cake for a wedding. If your convicitions are so strong then why sell them anything at all?

    Does he sell to people who do not subscribe to his bible or faith? What about people with interracial marriages or marriages of different faiths?

    Finally, Don’t be strutting around saying you are “Mr. Bible” when you have tattoos and piercings which is forbidden in YOUR bible.

    Bottom line: it is against Oregon law for a business to discriminate. You guys are all about your rules and laws when it works to discriminate against others, but when the shoe is on the other foot…suddenly big government is out to get you. He is in the wrong.

  65. Matt Kuksa says

    I totally support this baker. Business owners should have the right to reject business — for any reason. It’s their business and if they’re willing to take the loss, then so be it. Instead of trying to fight someone who doesn’t want your money, take it elsewhere.

  66. Bill says

    It’s interesting to see that no one is suggesting that Oregon secede from the union. No one thinks “all those people” are a bunch of hillbilly morons who should just be blown off the map? An Oregonian baker and half a San Francisco football team speak for themselves, but 1 dumbass in Alabama speaks for an entire region of the country? The ignorance is astounding.

  67. Markus says

    Bill, if you go to that very same web address you posted you will see this: 659A.029 “Because of sex” defined for ORS 659A.030

    The intention of the law was to add “sexual orientation” to the law as forbidden in housing and employment discrimination, but the GOP got “sexual orientation” changed to “sex.” This reders the law meaningless since “sex” means in law GENDER which is already a protected class.

    If you are just damned sure you are right and I am wrong then I beg you to return and cite a single case since that abortion of a compromise was passed in which even one gay person in Oregon has won a discrimination case based upon that law. You can’t because we are not protected under Oregon law.

  68. Markus says

    I want to add one more item to this specific to Oregon and gay rights, where I live in Medford there are a lot of militant anti gay christians, this is a very red county. There is a store here called AS SEEN ON TV. They sell gewgaws and doodads and junk you only see on infomercial type TV spots. They have two stores, the main one next to Harry and David’s flagship corporate store, and one in the mall.

    One day I was feeling very Town and Country and went to H&D and passing the as seen on tv store I noticed that they had a small chalkboard in the window that said HELP WANTED with a cross and a christian fish drawn on it.

    Have you any idea how illegal that is? And I am not talking state law here but federal law, you cannot advertise for employees based upon religious affiliations and moreover you cannot even hint at such a desire. I took a photo of the sign in the window and sent it to the EEOC with a complaint of discrimination based on religion. Guess what, two years later they are still posting the same signs.

    We can gain the law on our side, but without enforcement it is MEANINGLESS. I guess we have to start breaking windows or something. But the point is that hate is out there and we all have had to live with it. The fact that we are winning great victories in the law does not mean we won. This crap about religious freedom allowing landlords and employers and vendors to discriminate is just the next battle we will win, and they will find another way to hate us and fight us.

    I have said and I still believe the ONLY way to win is to hit them in the wallet. They don’t believe in christianity any more than I have lunch with leprechauns, they use it to channel hate in a way they think the government cannot interfere with. And they are right, the government could but will not enforce anti discrimination laws. You have to hit them where it hurts. $$$$

    Break their windows, key their cars, poison their dogs, what ever, and if it sounds cruel and you think it will backfire I have this to say, our young gay people are DYING! They do not care if they even know about it they applaud. Our property has been vandalized, our wallets have been hit by firings, lack of promotions, failure to hire us to start with. Even if we can get laws passed we can’t get them enforced. We do not have 100 years for civil society to evolve. One of the great truths is that the victor carries a CARROT and a STICK. But there is no use having a stick if you do not show you are willing to use it.

    I don’t really care that much anyway, I am getting ready to leave America. I am 54 and fought since I was 17, I am tired of it, I am going to go live where hate is not a way of life. To a place where christians are deluded but sincere about faith, not using it as a weapon to cover their own homosexual desires they deny and hate in themselves. Because that is the most painful part, almost all who hate us are just as gay as you and me themselves and cannot bring themselves to admit it. Not I or you will ever get them to, the more we win the more they feel pushed, the more they feel pushed the more they push back, like the baker who hates us so much, I would bet everything I own he is as queer as I am.

  69. Tom says

    If the law forced him to bake a lesbian’s cake he’d probably spit in it anyway. Once he’s been battered by bad publicity, felt the yolk of the law, he’ll realize he butter be sugary sweet to every layer of society or his blooming business will be de-floured; and that will be the icing on the cake.

  70. BETTY says

    “Break their windows, key their cars, poison their dogs, what ever, and if it sounds cruel and you think it will backfire I have this to say, our young gay people are DYING! They do not care if they even know about it they applaud.”

    Come on Markus are you serious? Yes, the best way to convince people that we want equal protection under the law is to break the law. The religious right have been portraying gay people as sick, awful people for years and do you think acting just like that and resorting to violence is going to help the cause? We don’t need to give them any more ammunition to use against us.

    We are better than that. If anybody advocates that strategy, well, they are no better than the relgious whackos. Give your head a shake.

    Btw when you find a place to live that is free from hate, let us know where this imaginary uptopia is located.

  71. Brenda says

    Next time I am in Oregon, I will make a dpecial trip to his bakery…….people who stand by their principles….we need more of them these days….society is in the gutter with our culture in this country

  72. jamal49 says

    I hope this insufferable reprobate will appreciate the social safety net that still exists in this country once his business goes under from lack of patronage because of his ill-advised public display of bigotry.

    Self-righteousness will always destroy the deserving bigot.

  73. Dback says

    Where Oregon’s anti-discrimination laws T-bone into the state’s vociferous defense of 1st amendment speech (our state that decided that nude dancing was form of 1st amendment freedom of expression; we take this stuff seriously)….hmm, who’ll win?

    The guy might receive a slap on the wrist from the state, but then he’s in line to become a first amendment cause celebre. I say rather than trying to shut him down via lawmakers, just make sure everyone you know buys their wedding cakes elsewhere. Let free market economics do the rest.

    And re: 2004–Oregon’s unofficial motto is: “Oregon–Don’t Tell Us What To Do.” There is a VERY strong libertarian streak here, more so I believe than the far-right conservative Christian crowd thinks. What boomeranged in 2004 was that the people felt that the legislature tried to do an end-run around the citizenry, and that provoked a backlash. Now, however, with Washington having legalized same-sex marriage and California presumably not far behind (once Prop 8 is overturned), THEN Oregon will get on board with its neighbors. It’s not a “we have to follow the crowd” mentality, it’s a “we do things at our own pace–not yours.” Next time it comes up to a vote (hopefully 2014), enough of the “old guard” from 2004 will have died off to strike the ban from the state Constitution. (Wouldn’t expect anything less from a state created on Valentine’s Day.)

  74. Acronym Jim says

    Suggestion for a protest: Everyone protesting dressed as Marie Antoinette, while chanting and carrying signs saying “Let Them Eat Cake*.”

    Let’s show this business just how absurd their policies really are.

  75. HUH says

    YELP cleared off all the negative comments about their business….

    They have cleared all the negative comments off their FB page leaving only those religious robots that agree with them…

    Put fingers from tattooed arms in pierced ears (breaking Leviticus 19:28) and refuse to listen to anybody who disagrees with your hypocritical self!

  76. says

    David Hearne, if those are the kind of intellectually-dishonest hoops you need to jump through in order to convince yourself that your family aren’t ashamed of you ,by all means sugarpie, keep it up. Nobody else is fooled, however.

  77. Bill says

    I just posted a detailed reply to Marcus’ claim about Oregon law and, while it was supposedly accepted, it never showed up. I won’t waste my time redoing that. The short answer is that the URL I gave clearly indicated that people are protected against discrimination based on sexual orientation and it was part of a document on an official web site maintained by the state of Oregon containing the 2011 edition of state laws. A list of changes for 2012 did not suggest anything would be different.

    If Marcus wants to claim otherwise, he should be able to provide a link to an official Oregon web page containing the statute and indicating that it represents the law at some point after 2011. Whatever is going on, the document I found clearly indicated that at one point in time, Oregon had forbidden discrimination based on sexual orientation in public accommodations.

  78. Bill says

    @Posted by: Bill | Feb 4, 2013 1:42:41 AM: Just to be clear, there seem to be two individuals posting as Bill (the post cited was from someone else and I don’t agree with him).

  79. Bill says

    @Acronym Jim: that’s a funny idea, but there is a better way to protest. Tell them you want a wedding cake with two guys on it, but it is not for a real wedding but rather for a play where an attempted wedding turns into a complete disaster, and that the play makes fun of same-sex weddings. They might make that cake, because the reason furthers their claimed beliefs.

    This gives them the chance to clearly shoot themselves in the foot – if sued for discrimination, they’d have to explain why they can make a same-sex wedding cake for one customer and not another. They won’t be able to claim “we can’t make one because we don’t have a supplier for figurines depicting same-sex couples.”

  80. BETTY says

    So there is a Facebook page dedicated to boycotting this establishment. Guess, who pipes in and leaves a comment on the page? Yep, “Mr. Hypocrite” the owner. You click on his page and surprise, surprise, he likes the NRA and Fox News. Interestingly he only has 39 friends. I imagine he must be a pleasure to be around which explains why he has so many friends.

    Hmmm kind of funny that he is quoting from the book of Genesis from the Old Testament when another Old Testament bible quote says he himself is an abomination. Those tattoos and ear piercings are a sin. Leviticus 19:28: “Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD.” I hope a store refuses to serve him in kind.

  81. Aunt Paddy says

    What’s wrong with someone refusing to make a cake for a gay person? Are they following their religious beliefs? Yes. We have freedom of religion? Yes! So, how can they tout one of The Bible’s teachings and own a cake shop that preys on the weakness of Gluttons? Huh? Gluttony is a deadly sin. Yes. They freely serve obese people. Oh…
    Freedom to partially practice your religion does not negate the laws of the land. Laws were put forth to protect citizens from the Govt, religion and each other. This business of a store owner thumbing his nose loudly at Oregon State Law is appalling and hypocritical when he does it under the obviously partial shroud of Jesus. By their ideology, the Sharia law of Islam should be practiced outside the laws of this free land, but that’s not the case now is it? This is another abhorrent case of: Condemn and Exclude (but excluding the bits of The Bible they don’t wish to follow themselves).

  82. Reilly says

    So what if this guy didn’t want to be part of celebrating two homosexuals marrying, due to his religious beliefs. Isn’t that his right? It’s a private business and therefore his loss or gain. That couple can freely go elsewhere where they will get service. He was not rude or cruel, he just briefly explained his belief. Now, I wonder what would have happened had they gone into a Muslim bakery and asked…….hmmmmm. Why not do that, and publicize THEIR response…DO it…try it. I dare any homosexual couple wishing to have a wedding cake made to do so.

  83. Markus says

    He is actually quite smart in some ways, he saw Chick-fil-A sales boom as homophobes and racists swamped those outlets in a backlash against gay people (look up Chick-fil-A Appreciation day) and thinks he can drum up business by taking an anti gay stand, he expects that the heteroAparteid crowd will line up at his door for his baked goods. And they probably will till the state shuts him down, because in Oregon law denying this lesbian a wedding cake bears exactly the same consequences as denying a black person baked goods. Or a Jewish person, or a handicapped person, or a Mexican national, or Catholic, or you get the picture, it simply is strictly prohibited.

  84. Markus says

    @Steve, there IS such an inclusive law in Oregon in public accomodations, in Oregon gay people are part of the protected classes that you cannot discriminate against.

    @Will, churches are specifically and federally exempt from anti discrimination laws. They cannot be made to marry anybody ever, if they do marry people it is by their choosing and their own standards.

    That is part of the reason why a lot of the arguments against gay marriage fail; people say their churches should not be forced to marry gay people, well guess what? They can’t be made to marry anybody anyway, gay or black or any other consideration.

    Aside from that the arguments about gay marriage pertain to how gay people are treated in CIVIL LAW, not in churches or “the eyes of god.” The majority do not even believe there is a god no less how it’s eyes perceive us. They might claim to in polling, but judging by their actions they simply use their so called belief as a shield from treating people equally, to protect their bigotry. Either that or they do not care if they go to hell.

    What if Muslims were to say they have a right to glue the buttocks of gay men closed and leave them to die from inability to excrete waste? It is their religious belief so the law dare not interfere with that right? Guess what, this is a fairly common form of “justice” in the Muslim world, especially in Iraq and Iran. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

  85. HUH says

    Yes Markus, but, he is also alienating gay friendly people as well as everyday people who may not be the loudest pro-gay supporters, but are still be turned off by this behaviour. Also, he is working in the wedding industry. Let’s face it, there are a lot of gay people who work in that industry and plan and provide services to a lot of STRAIGHT weddings. They may just not deal with him anymore, thus cutting off a lot of business for him.

  86. A Child of the LORD says

    I am in full support of the owner of the cake shop and hope that he has the fortitude to continue his belief. The state should not be able to interfere in his christian belief. I am praying for him, his wife, and their business. I can tell by all the comments that most of you do not have an inkling about the Bilble or what it says. I feel compassion for your ignorance because you will find that unless you change your destiny is not where I would want to go. I also pray to our eternal God for you.

  87. BETTY says

    Hi Child:

    He is a business person and he must adhere to state laws in regards to his business. Just because you are Christian you don’t get special rights and your “belief” does not trump state law. Clinging to a belief when it violates state law is not a get out of jail free card. There are many beliefs in your bible that are against the law. Nice try.

    By the way, he is in violation of God’s law: Leviticus 19:28 (just one of many).

    Get over your holier than though self. I don’t need you to pray for me. Pray for your fellow bible thumpers who judge and treat others differently and use your “bible” a reason. You will need it on your judgement day. God would not approve.

  88. Bill says

    Just an FYI, everyone throwing around the tattoo bit, that is in the old testament. The old testament was a guideline, essentially, for jews, and does not apply to Christians. If you actually studied Christianity, instead of basing your knowledge off of common misconceptions, you’d understand that the Old Testament is also known as the “laws” and when Christ died, He released His people from the Law, thus making the OT non applicable to Christians today.

    I find it interesting that, I, being an Atheist, knows this.

    I also find it interesting how angry some of you people are. A Gay couple has the right not to do business with a Christian (or any religion that is anti-gay) business, but a business cannot refuse service if it goes against their beliefs and moral grounds? Hmm.

  89. andreasjva says

    Would you force a custom cake bakery to make a cake for a Klan rally?

    The difference between discrimination and upholding the rights of someones beliefs lies in the choice. Deciding to join together legally is a choice, as deciding to join the Klan is a choice. To expect a cake artist to muster the inspiration to create a cake for a gay couple, is like forcing an artist to paint portraits of Hitler. You can’t legislate artistic will or vision. It would be as much of a disservice to buy your cake their, as it would be to force them to make it.

  90. Blake says

    If the man go’s to court in Oregon he then
    take it in to Federal Court and then sue the state of Oregon
    Read this Please
    Amendment I: Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly

    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.
    have a nice day

  91. maria says

    How many cupcakes would we avoid selling to customers if we had a crystal ball to gauge others lives? At what point in our JUDGEMENT would we realize that we were going to go out of business because many had issues that we found disturbing. Then, we would have to gauge which issue was the worst or justify that ONE guy because after all we can’t afford to go out of business because we have a family to feed and bills to pay. Are we more concerned about appearing to be God Fearing individuals and racking up brownie points or in some way are we “crumb by crumb” dehumanizing the people that God blew his breath into? Food for thought.

Leave A Reply