Oregon Christian Bakers Pay Over $135,000 in State-Ordered ‘Emotional Damages’ to Lesbians

  • Thread starter Thread starter CopyBoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Samuel_Monosov said:
I think that most Catholics will change their minds about this issue if they haven’t already.
Click to expand...
For what it’s worth, I used to support the views you are stating here. I am of a different opinion on the matter now. Also, for what it’s worth, I have known, do know and grew up around people with SSA, which is to say I am not “sheltered” in this matter.
 
Samuel_Monosov said:
Maybe interracial marriage is a choice that conflicts with a service provider’s deeply held beliefs. In this case, what do you think should be done?

And you as well. Happy New Year and Feast of St Mary, Mother of God.
Click to expand...
Having never personally discriminated against people seeking interracial marriage, I will speculate here. My opinion is that, if a service provider were to discriminate against people engaging in an interracial marriage, what he or she is really discriminating against is not what they are doing, but what one of the people is, i.e. the discrimination is motivated by race, not by action. If that is the case, I think it is wrong, especially if the service provider is providing a unique and essential service. If there is another competent and convenient provider of that service, I also think the people seeking the service should seek out a provider willing to provide the service rather than dragging the heavy hand of government into it, and perhaps let the community decide whether or not the discriminating service provider should remain in business. That’s a long way around to say that, even when I gave at least tacit support to same-sex marriage, the case of the New Mexico wedding photographers raised a red flag as to where this was heading.

I can’t recall now, did you address, or perhaps choose not to address, the point I raised asking if you are of the opinion that a bakery should be compelled by law to make a cake and adorn it with any given offensive, though not illegal, statement?
 
I am asking for speculation. Imagine there were someone who had deep belief that black people should marry black people and white people should marry white people. He claims not to have anything against black people or white people, he thinks that they are separate but equal, but nevertheless he firmly believes that it is bad to mix races.

He refuses to provide services for an interracial wedding. He’d be willing to make a cake for a wedding between two black or two white people, but not between a black and a white person. This is his firmly held belief. Also, imagine that many other bakers are out there who will provide services for the interracial couple. What do you think should be done? Do you think the State should have any recourse? Do you think that a baker who bakes wedding cakes should be able to refuse to bake cakes for interracial couples, due his to sincerely held beliefs?
Piney_Woods said:
I can’t recall now, did you address, or perhaps choose not to address, the point I raised asking if you are of the opinion that a bakery should be compelled by law to make a cake and adorn it with any given offensive, though not illegal, statement?
Click to expand...
No, not any given offensive statement. The baker could refuse to write certain messages. For example, if someone came in and said that they wanted a Schwastika cake. Maybe a cake without an offensive message, but rather a message with which the baker disagrees, this can also be refused, such as “God bless gay marriage” or even “Trump 2016”, these could probably be refused.

But maybe the baker thinks names like Jamal or Juan or Mohommed are offensive, and doesn’t want to make wedding cakes involving these names. This would clearly not be an acceptable excuse, and the baker should be forced legally to write these sorts of statements, even if the baker believes these statements to be offensive.

Same with if a baker is asked to write two men’s names on a cake, or “God bless the marriage of John and Jake Michelson” (even if he was a homophobe, or even if he was an atheist).

Such a baker, who finds these sorts of things to be insulting, should in my opinion find a different line of work.

Alternatively, I think that it may be acceptable for a baker to cater only to Catholic weddings, and advertise as a Catholic Baker (or whatever other denomination the baker may be part of). In that case, I think it would be acceptable to refuse service to any couple whose wedding the Catholic Church (or other religious group) would not recognise. This may be the best solution.
 
mjwise said:
The bakery raised over 500k on crowdfunding sites, so I guess they tidily profited from this little kerfluffle. Nice work, if you can get it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps God decided to bless these believers with an abundance as fair compensation for the “pain and suffering” they endured as a result of this attack on their beliefs.

👍
 
Such an obvious setup that could bring a believing Christian to tears. These people were known to be Christian bakers and the " couple" obviously targeted them with a request that would both violate the religious convictions of the bakers ( homosexuality** is **still condemned in the Bible, you know and conservative Christians, Jews and Muslims alike reject this practice as sinful) and provide something of a payday for the " couple" that made the request if the bakers heeded their consciences and refused the request.

There was absolutely no way the Christians could win… either violate their consciences and ruin their reputation in the Christian community ( what affianced Christian couple would want to patronize an establishment that had betrayed its Christian convictions for the sake of political correctness and money?) or follow their consciences and get sued by the " couple" who requested the cake for their ceremony and then get ostracized by the secular community?

Since 1964, the right to refuse service has been fairly restricted and as this latest affair proves, this will occasionally lead to clashes with the religious freedom and observance of the servers ( " servers" doesn’t necessarily translate to servants, as in somebody’s sworn to absolute obedience when he or she fills out a job app or is granted a business license), with the servers left high and dry and the plaintiffs rewarded in a case that had been all but handed to them from the start.

The baking company’s been shuttered because of this and I hope these bakers’ martyrdom is recognize for what it is: the courage to stand up for their beliefs in the face of overwhelming hostility christianpost.com/news/christian-bakery-closed-for-refusing-lesbian-wedding-cake-breaks-record-on-crowdfunding-site-with-352000-141657/.
 
That’s not how the American progressive movement works. Ones views are tolerated as long as they do not vary from progressive orthodoxy.

This was persecution, meant to send a message, that religious free exercise is no longer to be tolerated.

My recommendation to others who might be targeted in this way: do not refuse to serve. Instead, post a sign that lets people know that the profits will go to a traditional marriage defense organization.

Same thing with pharmacists required to sell abortifacients, all profits from the sale goes to National Right to Light, or some other group. Make them choose to help fund these organizations.
 
JonNC said:
That’s not how the American progressive movement works. Ones views are tolerated as long as they do not vary from progressive orthodoxy.

This was persecution, meant to send a message, that religious free exercise is no longer to be tolerated.

My recommendation to others who might be targeted in this way: do not refuse to serve. Instead, post a sign that lets people know that the profits will go to a traditional marriage defense organization.

Same thing with pharmacists required to sell abortifacients, all profits from the sale goes to National Right to Light, or some other group. Make them choose to help fund these organizations.
Click to expand...
Jon,
Great idea!!
 
JonNC said:
That’s not how the American progressive movement works. Ones views are tolerated as long as they do not vary from progressive orthodoxy.

This was persecution, meant to send a message, that religious free exercise is no longer to be tolerated.

My recommendation to others who might be targeted in this way: do not refuse to serve. Instead, post a sign that lets people know that the profits will go to a traditional marriage defense organization.

Same thing with pharmacists required to sell abortifacients, all profits from the sale goes to National Right to Light, or some other group. Make them choose to help fund these organizations.
Click to expand...
Great response. Proactive and non-discriminatory. 👍
 
LutheranScholar said:
Such an obvious setup that could bring a believing Christian to tears. These people were known to be Christian bakers and the " couple" obviously targeted them with a request that would both violate the religious convictions of the bakers ( homosexuality** is **still condemned in the Bible, you know and conservative Christians, Jews and Muslims alike reject this practice as sinful) and provide something of a payday for the " couple" that made the request if the bakers heeded their consciences and refused the request.

There was absolutely no way the Christians could win… either violate their consciences and ruin their reputation in the Christian community ( what affianced Christian couple would want to patronize an establishment that had betrayed its Christian convictions for the sake of political correctness and money?) or follow their consciences and get sued by the " couple" who requested the cake for their ceremony and then get ostracized by the secular community?

Since 1964, the right to refuse service has been fairly restricted and as this latest affair proves, this will occasionally lead to clashes with the religious freedom and observance of the servers ( " servers" doesn’t necessarily translate to servants, as in somebody’s sworn to absolute obedience when he or she fills out a job app or is granted a business license), with the servers left high and dry and the plaintiffs rewarded in a case that had been all but handed to them from the start.

The baking company’s been shuttered because of this and I hope these bakers’ martyrdom is recognize for what it is: the courage to stand up for their beliefs in the face of overwhelming hostility christianpost.com/news/christian-bakery-closed-for-refusing-lesbian-wedding-cake-breaks-record-on-crowdfunding-site-with-352000-141657/.
Click to expand...
agree totally and THANK YOU. A total lack of any respect for Christians, in fact an act of active aggression and yes, discrimination . Quite wilful and deliberate and totally shameful
 
These payouts for hundreds of thousands of dollars just promote feigned offence taking and feigned emotional distress.

I think it is very bad for society.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top