1. says

    well, then like with chick-fil-a, and the “we dont’ need no gun regulation!” crowd, i hope they indulge themselves into an early grave.


  2. Anders says

    Agreed. This was probably a publicity stunt all along. The saw how well hate worked in selling chicken sandwiches.

  3. Oh, the hypocrisy says

    You know maybe, just maybe, it’s not their “bigoted Christian supporters” who are coming out in droves, but people who think that just as gays should be free to live their lives and have individual choice and dignity, so too should business owners be free to live their lives and have individual choice and dignity, including the individual choice and dignity of deciding how they will engage their freedom of association — including who will and will not be their customers.

    Why are freedom, choice and dignity only a one-way street? Ought associational choices with which we disagree to be criminalized, or not? Do let’s avoid this one-direction-only hypocrisy, though.

  4. Caliban says

    These sorts of publicity “bumps” for businesses tend to be short-lived. Check back in 6 months or so and see what the real fall-out has been.

    It’s possible it may be good. Based on the after-church crowd in my area those religious folks must put away a lot of pies!

    Long term I suspect they’ll lose business though.

  5. AG says

    @ Oh, the hypocrisy
    What are you talking about? This is a site for totalitarian progs (who happen to be gay). Freedom and individual choice are alien concepts to the regulars here. Criminalizing those who disagree with them is exactly what they want.

  6. says

    “Oh The Hypocrisy” should change his name to “I Like Being A Doormat”

    Guys, its’ one of our resident trolls. I mean, come on.

    One more gay coward who can’t put a face to his opinions, and those opinions are nothing more than a regurgitation of the bigotry and ignorance his parents fed him instead of love and intellectual discernment.

  7. Jake says

    Sorry, but the law should not make businesses actions that go against their religious beliefs. Making cakes for a wedding is to some an endorsement of a particular prospective marriage, and as such, can contravene certain religious beliefs. It is not like merely serving a gay individual at a bank, the cleaners, or a restaurant, which are morally neutral. If we want people to respect the right of same=sex couples to have marriages that contravene many peoples’ religious beliefs, we much be tolerant of the right of religious people not to participate in any way in those marriages or weddings. People should be able to opt out of actions that implicitly or explicitly endorse same-sex or any other type of marriage. Religious liberty is paramount in our constitutional freedoms.

  8. luminum says

    Right, because “protesting” means “criminalization”. Ought Oh, The Hypocrisy and AG learn the difference between public expression and legal criminality? Perhaps they ought to understand that an action can be recognizably distasteful and yet not illegal? Methinks so.

  9. says

    the day any of you “i support their right to discriminate” cowards can put an actual face to your comments will be the day your pathetic and cowardly opinions will be taken seriously.

    and we all know it’ll never come.

  10. Steve says

    Business owners simply don’t have the right to refuse customers randomly. And public accommodation laws have been in place for decades. Running a business is a privilege. Not a right.

  11. Steve says

    BS. A cake is a cake. It’s not endorsing anything. Baking a cake is not “participating in a wedding”. If you go down that route, anything can become an expression of religion and “freedom of religion” becomes nothing but an excuse to not follow the law. Which is exactly what the Christian Taliban want.

    The whole idea of a “Christian business” is absurd and a perversity that could only exist in the US.

  12. Steve says

    Also “religious liberty” only means that you won’t get thrown in jail or legally punished for professing certain beliefs. Which is what happened for centuries. And does not and has never meant freedom of action. You can believe, but you can’t do what you want. The courts are very explicit in that distinction.

  13. Huh? says

    @ Oh, the Hypocrisy and AG:

    Just to be sure, you both are against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which addressed Jim Crow laws concerning separate facilties and businesses for whits and blacks?

  14. AG says

    “Running a business is a privilege. Not a right.”

    In Barack Obama’s America that’s certainly true. One has to be his crony.

  15. Dastius Krazitauc says

    As long as bigots can show enthusiastic support by enthusiastically eating, there will always be a “Chick-fil-A Effect.”

  16. 1♥ says

    To Jake, AG, and Oh the hypocrisy,
    So you do support the KKK and other white supremacy groups, correct. All of those kinds of groups are based on their Christian religion and they have that biblical word of your god to prove their prejudice is justified.
    So just to be clear, you do support any bakery’s right to NOT make a Jewish wedding cake or a cake for mixed faiths and/or races. Correct.

  17. AG says

    Don’t trivialize Jim Crow and segregation. Are you really saying that the treatment of Blacks in the US South sixty years ago was as bad as not getting a wedding cake?

  18. AG says


    If you’re a restaurant owner, what recourse do you have against the local chapter of the American Nazi party if it decides to hold its weekly meetings in you restaurant?

  19. Will says

    All those morons saying a business should be able to decide who they serve…REALLY!? If it was an interracial couple being refused service no one would think twice about how absurd this is. I’m sick of all those gays that feel that we are second class citizens and should be treated as such. If that’s how you feel stay in your house, piss in jars, and wear Kleenex boxes on your feet because you have nothing to contribute to society.

  20. AG says

    If this baker refuses to make a cake with three big KKK letters on it, do you think Oregon Attorney General should investigate him? If not, why not?

  21. Walter says

    Plain and simple is it illegal in Oregon to discriminate against anyone on basis of any kind then the shop is in the wrong.

  22. says

    you mean besides the fact that the KKK are a designated hate group and gay couples aren’t, you complete idiot?

    how’s the anonymous trolling going? way to make daddy proud!

  23. 1♥ says

    As long as they are peaceful, and not causing a disturbance there is nothing you can do. That’s the price one pays for having a business open to the public.

  24. Caliban says

    So may we assume these “Christian” bakers investigate everyone to whom they supply a cake? Do they check to see whether they engaged in pre-marital sex? What about if the upcoming “holy union” started as an adulterous affair for one or both? Would they deny the couple their services?

    Of course not. Because they’re hypocrites, not “Christians.”

  25. 1♥ says

    You said,” “Running a business is a privilege. Not a right.”

    In Barack Obama’s America that’s certainly true. One has to be his crony.”

    You do not have the right to open a liquor store in a “dry county” that does not allow alcohol. Those are conservative right wing counties BTW.

  26. Francis says

    Ignoring these right-wing gay (or faking as gay) trolls, the CFA affect has led to an increase in sales but a steep decrease in viability of their brand—-the companies’ brand rating has declined. Let the bigots support one another. At the end of the day, these people are on the wrong side of today and the wrong side of history.

    The lesbian couple in the middle of the discrimination will have their cake baked by Duff Goldman. I don’t think they’re going to be shedding tears over a bigot at their marriage ceremony. The story has become national and yet another example of the discrimination we face as who we are. Every one of these attempts to segregate and discriminate from these conservative fundamentalist haters are doing nothing but exposing them as the hateful wenches they are and driving people away from such divisive, intolerant ways of thinking.

    Oregon has discriminatory policies in place and you cannot discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in the state of Oregon. A bakery isn’t a church, and Aaron Klein didn’t do his job. Hope he has fun paying punitive damages!

  27. jamal49 says

    Hey, there’s big bucks to be made publicizing your bigotry and passing yourself off as a victim of those bullying gays. Expect this to become a national trend. They outnumber us so they will always win these battles, which we need to choose much more wisely if we are going to fight and win over the bigots.

  28. antb says

    wow, these new concern trolls really seem to have all the answers, like they are reading from the same set of talking points. the points are highly incomplete & the logic is faulty, but they sure sound truthy.

  29. BETTY says

    PFFT. They can SAY they are “booming”, but I’ll believe that if in 6 months they are still around. You might have received a temporary bump from your fellow bigots, but longterm the wedding planners and other businesses that you rely on will think twice about sending anymore business your way.

  30. mvecera says

    Yeah, but the inflation of business is just as temporary as the protest. No one stands in line outside a Chick-fullof-hate anymore. How many times does a normal family need to run to a bakery for a cake?

  31. Huh? says


    Given that gays have been fired from their jobs, denied housing, acces to their own children, beaten, and murdered, aside from the discrimination inherent in the refusal of a baker to make a lesbian couple a wedding cake, yes, I think a comparison is apt. You’re lying if you haven’t witnessed verbal or physical abuse of gays. It’s perfectly acceptable in some circles.

    Your arbitrary classification of who is acceptable to be served in a public establishment doesn’t help your argument.

  32. Jonathan says

    AG – Yeah those progs are just awful evil nazis out to strip you of your rights and make you a second class citizen.

    You sound like such a pathetic fool – without progressives having paved the way for legal rights for gay people you’d be cowering in a closet hating yourself and others for merely existing.

    Yeah, “Progs and libs” are so awful to you, we weep for you you poor downtrodden moron.

  33. says

    Huh – AG is simply one of the aliases of this site’s designated anonymous cowardly trolls.

    either a miserable homosexual closet-case and racist, a miserable heterosexual NOM-head with nothing better to do, or one of those types who needs to spout right-wing talking points or else his parents will beat him again.

  34. jd says

    I hope that a small part of each of these people knows that in 20 years, their children will be ashamed of their behavior.

  35. Jake says

    “So just to be clear, you do support any bakery’s right to NOT make a Jewish wedding cake or a cake. Correct.”

    Actually, yes. I don’t think the government has a compelling reason to force people to endorse, participate, or further marriages that violate their religious beliefs. Proving services to a couple is not morally neutral, it is an inherently moral act. If you don’t think so, it’s because you don’t share the religious beliefs of those who don’t want to be involved in furthering something they sincerely think is a sin. We should be sensitive enough to not want to force people to violate their sacred beliefs, even if we don’t share those beliefs. I think the 1st Amendment protects people from being forced by the state to engage in actions that contravene their religious beliefs. It is the most fundamental of rights and can only be violated when the government has the most compelling government interests. The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest, and the presumption should be that any encroachment on a religious liberty is unconstitutional, not constitutional. And by the way, the Constitution protects the exercise and practice of religious beliefs, not just mere passive belief. That is called Free Exercise.

  36. Huh? says


    Unlike AG, you actually have a consistent argument against the Oregon anti-disrimination law (to say nothing of the Civil Rights Act). It’s not just the first amendment, really, either, since there are restrictions on every amendment in the Bill of Rights. It’s more about public vs. private. The debate over where private property meets the common good is not an easy one, and I doubt it will be resolved any time soon.

    I happen to believe racial integration would never have been implemented without government interference, and neither would women in the workplace, among other situations we now take for granted. I understand the libertarian point of view, but I just disagree with it. It’s one of those philosophies that sounds good in theory but doesn’t work in practice. For example, if you could ask black people who staged sit-ins in segregated diners during the Civil Rights era about their experiences, they wouldn’t say that equality under the law didn’t just happen. Whites didn’t just turn around and say, “Oh, I guess I was being immoral. Sorry ’bout that. Here’s the root beer float you ordered!” It was violent. The government had to do someting in order to establish civil equality.

  37. says

    exactly – Huh? Exactly. exactly. exactly.

    fun fact – in 2013 we still have angry white folks bitter about how the government forced them to integrate.

    many of them have been commenting here all day.

  38. Mawm says

    If you don’t want to serve all of the public, including the KKK, don’t open a business. As long as your customers are law abiding, serve them. No one cares what your religious beliefs are when you are serving heated sugar and flour. Get over yourselves.

  39. gomez says

    as a place of public accomodation, you can’t discriminate to the public based on religion.

    no exeptions

  40. ELI says

    Based on your comment you must support the religous right to own slaves or men owning women.

    As far as I’m concern, bigotry masked in religion is still bigotry

  41. GregV says

    “Making cakes for a wedding is to some an endorsement of a particular prospective marriage, and as such, can contravene certain religious beliefs. It is not like merely serving a gay individual at a bank, the cleaners, or a restaurant, which are morally neutral.”

    @Jake: ANYTHING anyone does can potentially contravene religious beliefs, which are often completely arbitrary and illogical in their reasoning. A banker may not want to lend money for an inter-racial couple for their mortgage. A cleaner may not want to clean a suit for a Bar Mitzvah. A restaurant owner may not want to serve a black family because of the formerly-common interpretations of rhe Tower of Babel and the Curse of Ham.
    There is nothing more inherently “neutral” about any other job compared to a baker.

  42. says

    So he won’t make a cake for a lesbian wedding because he “goes against his religion”?

    I guess that means he also shouldn’t make cakes for non-Christians, atheists, divorcees, adulterers, and people who had pre-martial sex. Whoops…there goes 99% of his clientele!

  43. me_in_pdx says

    What they don’t realize is that that “show of support” will go down at some point and if they are actually sued or something by the state that will eat those revenues faster than you can say cake. Is too sad that there are people out there that still have this line of thinking. Hopefully one day they will change.

  44. me_in_pdx says

    If you allow for bigotry from one business because of their “religious” beliefs you are opening a VERY BIG slippery slope for other businesses to act on “other” beliefs that may not be religious. I mean where is it to stop? We all have things to argue about, I like blue but you may not like blue, therefore I wont serve you because you are wearing blue. If you but a stop to bigotry, then maybe, we will be better. Tell me, how are those business owners going to be able to “police” future cakes? Believe me, if someone wanted to use one of their cakes for a gay wedding, they will find a way. What are those business owners going to do? File a lawsuit because their “religious” beliefs were broken?

  45. David Hearne says

    @ one heart

    “So you do support the KKK and other white supremacy groups, correct.”

    I support their right to free speech, freedom of association, and their property rights. And so does the ACLU.

    What is that you don’t understand? Have you never read , ‘I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”?

  46. David Hearne says

    @ Will

    I don’t think we are second class citizens. IN defending this man’s right to freedom of association I am defending my own right to freedom of association. He doesn’t have to serve me and I don’t have to serve him, and neither of us has to serve the idiot Kiwi.

  47. Blake says

    When is Towleroad going to make it necessary to log in to comment, like one of the few things that Queerty has done right?

    The schitzophrenic troll is getting rather annoying.

    He is running a business not a religious establishments, he either serves all or none.

  48. Dearcomrade says

    The short term boost in sales is fortunate for these people in that they will need the money for the inevitable legal fees & probable fines. When pay up time comes their fans will have had their fill of cake.

  49. Buckie says

    Well, looks like this little family owned bakery has got all the free PR it could ever want.

    And business is booming.

    Way to go.

  50. Matt Kuksa says

    “Bigoted christian supporters?” Says who?

    Who is anyone to assume that every supporter of this business is either a bigot or a christian? Maybe this bakery makes good desserts and their customers aren’t deterred by this fallout…or maybe they are experiencing a boost in revenue from people who believe in the business owners right to refuse service for any reason and to not be forced into submitting because their position may be unpopular.

    It’s a bitter pill to swallow, I know, but not everyone who isn’t a supporter of the gays is a bible thumbling christian. Plenty of Chick-Fil-A fans are probably anything BUT church goers.

    You’ve let the media convince that gays have become so full circle that at this point there’s a line in sand with one side being gays, allies, friends/family and a general public who supports gays….and on the other are bigots who only dislike gays because of what their religion told them.

    I don’t think that’s the case even half the time.

    Yeah, sure there are religious bigots, who hold scripture as their justification for not liking gays. However, there are some people who dislike gays simply because they think homosexuality is odd or too different from who they are…and there other people are merely apathetic and don’t give a crap about the gay/anti-gay struggle, don’t see it as a race they have a dog in and therefore don’t allow themselves to get caught up the push and pull of situations like this.

  51. DanTheMan says

    If this lesbian couple doesn’t sue them, another gay couple should. It’s a clear legal victory in court.

  52. Jordan says

    Matt Kuksa…nice try but our gay movement has made more strides in a very short period of time than any other movement before it. We’re winning and we’re beating you all badddd. We won this culture war. We came out, PROUDLY openly gay, and made sure our coworkers, friends and those around us knew it. Then we took our movement to elected officials and politicians and have made our cause one of our PRESIDENTS most prominent agendas. Then we took our movement to media/movies/entertainment industry. We also appealed to the youth.
    Now being against gays IS very unpopular and does result in major backlash of being pegged as that backward bigot you described.

    Face it. Your side lost, our side won, and on a daily basis OUR SIDE (and yes, it is sides) is attaining more and more members and allies. The momentum is toward our movement.
    You can only source one “victory” Chik Fil A (which has attained so much more backlash than actual gains)
    We can source a million gay related victories in the past 6 months, to your ONE fast food chain example.

  53. 1♥ says

    To David Hearne,
    I didn’t say that I didn’t support their right to free speech, freedom of association, and their property rights.


    I can play your childish game too.
    I do not support KKK bigots like you that would deny people equal service to the public.
    And if you don’t like be called a Klansman then don’t lie about what I say.

  54. says

    Those protesting the bakery’s discriminatory business practices are exercising their free speech rights, so anyone who supports free speech should be applauding their actions. Likewise, the bakery owners have the right to say whatever they want about gay people and to air whatever bigoted beliefs they hold. That doesn’t give them the right, however, to exclude groups they don’t happen to like from a public business–the first amendment doesn’t give people the right to ignore non-discrimination laws for religious or any other reasons. I’m not sure why some posters here are confused about that.

  55. Rob Cochran says

    “I would rather have my kids see their dad stand up for what he believes in, than have him bow down because one person complained.” There are thousands more than you know that complain about this. Stop hiding behind your religion and just admit that you are a bigot and a homophobe. You may be enjoying a “Chick-fillet” effect from this act of bigotry, but I can assure you, a month from now those who flocked to support you will not be bothered by your supposed martyrdom. 20 years from now, this will be just another embarrassing chapter in American civil rights history. You and your discriminatory stance will be used as an example to teach children in our country how we once were so hateful and bigoted. Is that the legacy you want to leave for your children? Meanwhile, those who stood up for civil rights and equality in this country will remember. And we will be proud of our actions to oppose you. Mark my words, this will not be forgotten.