Comments

  1. johnny says

    Jesus said: “Feed the hungry.”

    Marie Antoinette said: “Let them eat cake!”

    Dude, it’s not a “gay cake”, it’s just cake. Not everyone that eats it is going to be gay, just bake it and let it go. You do your religion a great disservice to use it as a tool for your intolerance and bigotry.

  2. FFS says

    Gay dollars are just as green and spend just as well as straight dollars. When are these rubes gonna learn what it means to be Americans?

    Americans shut the hell up and take the money.

  3. Chris says

    They asked him to bake a cake—-not have gay sex. When will these bigots learn they can’t hide behind the bible and Jesus when they clearly don’t understand his teachings.

  4. Critifur says

    If you follow Jesus Christ, truly, then you would probably make the cake. If you are a follower of the old testament, maybe not. If you are a follower of the born again bigot preachers, then you will definitely make an ass of yourself.

  5. Matt Darren says

    I very much hope the courts rule against this bigotted “Christian”, who like so many of them does not seem to realize that there is not one single word uttered about homosexuality by Jesus Christ in their holy book. I also hopes he shuts down his business after the ruling. I wouldn’t want him baking a cake for anyone he so obviously hates.

  6. Matt Darren says

    I very much hope the courts rule against this bigotted “Christian”, who like so many of them does not seem to realize that there is not one single word uttered about homosexuality by Jesus Christ in their holy book. I also hopes he shuts down his business after the ruling. I wouldn’t want him baking a cake for anyone he so obviously hates.

  7. Chris says

    Lawyer: “Did the gentlemen there ask you to bake a cake, or have gay sex with them?”

    Baker: “Bake a cake.”

    Lawyer: “Ok. Here is the Bible. Please show us where you are prohibited from baking a cake?”

    Baker:

    Lawyer: “On a side note, that shirt you are wearing is clearly a mix of two different fabrics—Leviticus 19:19. Which is not allowed in the Bible. You sir, are clearly going to hell.”

  8. HadenoughBS says

    Jesus Christ indeed! Where in the New Testament does JC say anything – ANYTHING – against gay people or gay relationships? You proclaim to follow JC but you don’t follow what he said or even what he stood for. What kind of non-Christian Christian are you???

  9. Neil says

    In my opinion, Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig were in the wrong for wanting this baker to go against his conscience. Getting a cake is not a civil right. They could have easily taken their business elsewhere. While they complain about him forcing their views on them, they are doing the same thing by forcing their views on him.

    What if the shoe were on the other foot and a GLBT Center were forced to accommodate a hate group or be prosecuted?

    On matters of real civil rights, I would completely be on their side, but in this case I think they are being bullies. If we want people to respect our consciences, we need to give other people that same courtesy.

  10. jamal49 says

    So, why this bakery? Why not take their business somewhere else? Then do an online campaign and get everybody to give the business a bad rating until no one shops there? Sometimes I wonder how much it matters? I mean, christians are scum. Why even do business with them?

  11. MikeBoston says

    @Neil – Actually, in this instance, they did have a civil right to a cake. Non-discrimination laws are written for exactly these circumstances. When you open a business to the public, you can’t simply pick a class of people that are not welcome as customers. There are exceptions where a class may be excluded – minors are not allowed in bars, for example. Those signs that say something like “Management reserves the right to refuse service…” only mean that an individual can be refused service if they are in some way disrupting normal business – a drunk in a bar, for example.

    The reason it is important to not simply go elsewhere is that is discrimination – and no one should tolerate discrimination.

  12. epsilon says

    What if the customers were black or female, and this cakehater denied them service based on his religion, would all you noob apologists say he had every right to do what he is doing?

  13. says

    @Neil & @Jamal49: Non-discrimination laws are in place for a reason, to prevent businesses from targeting a group for exclusion. States are saying: this is your deal if you want to have a business here. In this case it was a gay couple, but the same law would apply if a business hung out a NO BLACKS JEWS CHRISTIANS WOMEN ETC ALLOWED. Business owners can hold whatever beliefs they like, but they can’t use them as an excuse to discriminate.

    The point isn’t that a couple couldn’t go elsewhere (am sure they’d want to) but that businesses that can’t abide by state law and give equal respect to all customers should not be in business. Those who think it’s ok for businesses to discriminate should oppose all non-discrimination laws, unless they think religious people deserve a special right to discriminate?

  14. Hdtex says

    If you want to run a church, run a church. If you want to run a bakery (or a hotel or a wedding hall), then you can’t discriminate.

    And yes, by law, they have the civil right to a cake. Period.

  15. Neil says

    @MikeBoston He didn’t refuse a class of people service based on their orientation. He was perfectly willing to sell them whatever they wanted. He refused to bake a particular type of cake for a ceremony that went against his conscience.

    It is a matter of religious freedom and conscience.

  16. Johnny says

    Wonder what they would say if you told them the cakes is for a straight couple but there are going to be gays at the wedding who are going to eat it too….lol.

  17. Michael says

    Jesus met a gay man, via the Roman Centurion, and said of him, “Never have I seen faith greater than this” and did NOT end it with “now go and sin no more.” Jesus also mentions gay men as ‘born eunuchs’ in Matthew and again did not condemn.

  18. john patrick says

    So if I have a business licensed to serve the public, and I decide it is against my religion to serve “Christians,” I should be able to do so? Is that what those who refuse to serve gay couples believe – that religious belief trumps the law? I am sure they would be crying “discrimination” all the way to the Supreme Court if anyone refused to serve them.

  19. says

    You are incorrect, @Neil. He could refuse to bake wedding cakes for all customers, but he was only refusing to bake a wedding cake for gay customers. That is targeting a group for exclusion, and it is illegal in CO. It is definitely not a matter of religious “freedom” unless you believe the religious have a special right to discriminate or that we live in a theocracy.

  20. I wont grow up says

    This is a VERY slippery slope. I agree with Neil, in that would it be proper for a gay baker be prohibited from refusing to bake a cake for Pat Robertson’s birthday. This knife cuts both ways. Forcing anyone to do something that they disagree with on the basis of their faith is a violation of their rights to worship as they please. Don’t give me that nonsense of public accommodation, it doesn’t fly. This is just another publicity hungry couple and their ambulance chasing lawyer trying to make a buck. As a gay man I find it ridiculous, there are more important battles to be fought. If my partner of more than 35 years and I decide to get married we’ll pick a gay baker, and honey child if you’ve ever been in the restaurant business as we were, they are easy to find. You can’t swing a cat without hitting one. So Dave and Charlie, move on, get over yourselves, we can’t impose our beliefs on all people. It will never happen. There will always be haters and people different from us. Life is too short, we have to pick the right battles.
    Now all you radical gay rights boys and girls can attack me, I’m 65 and a Stonewall era fairy I can take it. Just my opinion.

  21. Chris says

    @Neil – one can argue that it is a matter of conscience but it is not a matter of religious freedom. The couple did not ask him to go against his beliefs and engage in gay sex. They asked him to bake a cake which as far as I know is not prohibited from the bible. So no impeding on religious freedom there.

    However it did go against his conscience. He is a bigot and against gay people (just using the bible to hide behind his bigotry). And if gays are a legally protected class in that state then despite his conscience, he acted illegally.

  22. Paul R says

    I’d care about this story more if it weren’t obvious that both sides are being stubborn and seeking publicity, however negatively it might reflect on them.

    If the couple simply wanted a cake, they could have gotten one from a place that respected them. If the bakery owner felt so strongly about not baking them a cake, he could have apologized and recommended other bakeries. But both sides dug in their heels, it went to the media, and now their lives have been overtaken by it.

    It’s just a cake. If I don’t like someone or they don’t like me, we avoid each other. I wouldn’t want a zealot who hates me baking my wedding cake, and I’d publicize the owner’s views online and in other forums. But taking it to court seems frivolous.

  23. says

    “Don’t give me that nonsense of public accommodation, it doesn’t fly.”

    If you think non-discrimination laws are nonsense and that business owners should be able to turn away whomever they like, then non-discrimination laws don’t fly with you. However, they’re clear in many states, and from a legal standpoint refusing equal service to people you don’t like (for religious or any other personal reasons) is what doesn’t fly.

  24. Sargon Bighorn says

    Paul R: spoken like someone that has never known an instant of discrimination. The couple is working within the law, that’s not being stubborn. Public business serve THE PUBLIC!

    If a Black man in 1960 Alabama SIMPLY wanted a sandwich, he could have gone to some other cafe. That is what you are saying. Your bigotry is showing. It’s not pretty.

  25. Bill says

    @Paul R: I disagree regarding the gay couple. They probably drove to the bakery and only then found out that they would be discriminated against. If this were a small town with one bakery, the nearest alternative could be 50 miles away. Allowing businesses to discriminate in that way means that they can force gays to live somewhere else by making everyday activities time consuming relative to their neighbors.

  26. Enchantra says

    He has the right to refuse to work for someone he choose not to work for. Opening a business is not supposed to abrogate your right to freedom of association. Do not quote the law to me on this, the courts have ruled against the freedom of association. It isn’t the first time the courts have found it convenient to trample individual rights.

  27. 1♥ says

    By the logic of those who support this baker then must also support bakers that are members of the Ku Klux Klan or Nation of Islam which are both religious organization that do not support interracial or interfaith marriage.
    Hiding behind religion to cloak your bigotry still makes you a bigot.
    And, yes, a gay baker is required by law to provide the same service to the anti-gay groups I listed above

  28. George Deeming says

    …then he should prominently post a sign on the door ( or somewhere in the shop )that states “WE ONLY SERVE HETEROSEXUALS”

    …then we’ll see how much business he does.

  29. Paul R says

    @Sargon, who exactly am I being a bigot toward? I merely said that I wouldn’t want to give money to a guy who hates me and is making my food. Calling me a bigot is an absurdity that I don’t need to defend. (Am I antigay or….what? If you think I’m antigay, then I can officially brand you an idiot.) And yes, loss of business often adjusts owners’ perspectives, even if service isn’t always served with a smile. Also, this isn’t a public business. It’s private. Public means run by the state or feds. Yes, it’s open to the public and must adhere to public policy. Not the same thing.

    @Bill, your point makes more sense. That said, this isn’t an issue that affected anyone’s lives, jobs, kids, or other serious rights. It’s a cake. No matter how the case is decided, there are bigger fish to fry.

  30. jarago says

    I’m sorry he is a BAKER not the Pope( who by the way sounds a lot more tolerant than this moron) He really should read the Bible- Jesus message was about love, and acceptance for all.

  31. calpoidog says

    ..but I guess since the Bible allows it, he would bake a cake for a polygamist marrying his 5th wife?

    I think I agree that I would not want to burden my life/happiness with a lawsuit against the baker and would go elsewhere and that’s everyone’s right to make that decision.

    That being said, I also agree the law is pretty clear in many states (not all states include “gay” as a class of citizens to be protected btw). If someone wants to challenge, I would whole-heartedly support it. What’s next? A doctor won’t treat you or a hospital admit you? It’s a slippery slope to say that businesses should be able to make these choices.

  32. says

    I remember in the mid 80’s stopping at a local gas station with a very butch girl friend of mine. The lady working there was obviously disturbed by my friends looks. I asked to use the restroom. She said with a sneer “it’s broken”.

    I frowned and went somewhere else (as fast as I could).

    It’s against the law in Texas for a gas station not to provide those accommodations to a customer.

    You know what? I should have stood up for myself and the law. She was wrong and she should have been called on it.

    I say good for the gay couple!

  33. Jeremy says

    It is none of the Owner’s Business what the cake is for or what names go on the cake.

    If you walked into his bakery and said “…please put ‘Congrats Betsy and Patricia’…” and the owner refused citing religious preferences….and you then countered “….They are my daughters and they’ve graduated”… He would surely make the cake.

    If you said “Please put Congrats Betsy and Patricia” on the cake and said no more…HE WOULD HAVE TO BAKE THE CAKE. He would have NO REASON NOT TO. Because it’s just Names on a cake.

    BUT……..It is ONLY BECAUSE HE KNEW IT WAS FOR TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME GENDER “PLANNING TO MARRY” THAT HE REFUSED TO PUT THE NAMES ON THE CAKE.

    HE HAS NO RIGHT GRILLING YOU LIKE A POLICE OFFICER AS TO WHY YOU WANT NAMES ON A CAKE.

    AND THAT IS WHY IT IS AGAINST THE LAW, DEAR TROLLS, AND WHY HE IS BEING SUED.

    IN AMERICA: IT IS NONE OF HIS DAMN BUSINESS WHOSE NAME GOES ON A CAKE.

    BUT YOU KNOW REPUBLICAN TROLLS;

    They just love themselves some discrimination in public accomodation laws…They just might be able to get their slaves and plantations back that their great-great ‘Big Daddies’ lost during the war of the Northern Agression.

  34. kdknyc says

    A straight man running a cake decorating shop? He looks gay to me in the photo–I thought he was the plaintiff until I watched the video.

    Which begs a question–how good could a cake be decorated by a straight man?

    But stereotyping aside, our country is run by civil law not religious law, and the “denial of the cake decorator’s first amendment” begins when he hangs a sign out and starts a business that is open to the public. But these people willfully don’t want to see that.

Leave A Reply