Bakery That Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple Raises Record-Breaking Donat

[KriszDev]

A fund set up for Aaron and Melissa Klein, the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, had raised $372,000 by Friday afternoon. The couple shut down the Gresham bakery in 2013 amid backlash over their decision not to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple because, they said, it was against their Christian beliefs.

Earlier this month, the bakery owners were ordered to pay a total of $135,000 in damages to the couple "for emotional and mental suffering resulting from the denial of service," according to court documents from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries.

The donations made on the site Continue To Give surpassed the goal of the fund by $222,000, and has raised the most money of any personal fundraiser on the site to date, Continue to Give founder Jesse Wellhoefer said.

Read More

I can only hope Aaron and Melissa Klein file suit against the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries for violating their 1st Amendment and Civil Rights under the Civil Rights Act.

First Amendment

Amendment I

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.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

Civil Rights Act of 1964

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark piece of civil rights legislation in the United States[5] that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Religion and religious practice is a protected class by not only the First Amendment to the Constitution as an right but also Codified in the Civil Rights Act. The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries trampled those rights with their decision and should be made to pay for their religious discrimination. I would welcome this one heading for the SCOUTS and would be willing to donate as much as I can to get it there.

[tigervod]

I would welcome this one heading for the SCOUTS and would be willing to donate as much as I can to get it there.

Good luck with that. (Save your money, though).

Religious belief is not an excuse for breaking the law.

The SCOTUS has ruled on this in the past, it probably won't do so again.

Render unto Caesar.

[KriszDev]

Good luck with that. (Save your money, though).

Religious belief is not an excuse for breaking the law.

The SCOTUS has ruled on this in the past, it probably won't do so again.

Render unto Caesar.

You mean Hobby Lobby? Religious freedom is already the law.

[godlyitems]

Good luck with that. (Save your money, though).

Religious belief is not an excuse for breaking the law.

The SCOTUS has ruled on this in the past, it probably won't do so again.

Render unto Caesar.

I believe the 1st Amendment's correct intent is to prevent the government from singling out a specific religion (ex. an employer refusing to hire someone because they're Catholic).

It wasn't intended to provide affirmative action for religious people, as in give "religious" people an exclusive right to do certain things which other people can't.

The argument the OP's making is the same argument which has occurred in cases where Muslim women claimed "religious discrimination" for wearing a veil in violation of employee dress code (even though no other women are allowed to cover their face), so it's equally foolish. The Hobby Lobby decision should be modified as well.

Ideally though I'd like to see anti-discrimination laws only apply to larger companies which service a large percentage of the public, not mom and pop stores like this - I don't think that small businesses which can't afford a lawsuit should have to fear going out of business over dubious discrimination claims.

That and I'd like to see putative damages awarded to a charity of the plantiff's choosing rather than the plaintiff themselves - this would cut down on frivolous lawsuits - so yeah I'm happy they got their donation money, because if being offended is worth $135,000 in damages, then anyone who visits 4chan should be a billionaire.

[issacsy]

Bigotry has a strong following.

[engwell]

Now who looks like the victim and who the beneficiary of this brouhaha. If I need to pay off my debtors, I'll become a bigot with a bible and watch the cash roll in.

[godlyitems]

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark piece of civil rights legislation in the United States[5] that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Correct, this means that a business can't hang a sign up which says "no Christians" allowed or "no Catholics allowed". It shouldn't mean however that religious practice receive special privilege which other things don't get.

Just like a business can't hang up a sign which says "no Muslims allowed" - that doesn't mean that a Muslim employee should have a right to wear a burka to the office when no other women are allowed to cover their face.

Whatever the law is, it should apply equally to all, as long as a certain religion isn't singled out then there's no legitimate claim to discrimination.

On the flip side though, the amount of money awarded by the lawsuit is bogus.

[peterson33]

Now who looks like the victim and who the beneficiary of this brouhaha. If I need to pay off my debtors, I'll become a bigot with a bible and watch the cash roll in.

Televangelist scammers have been grabbing people by their Jesus and shaking money out of them for as long as broadcasting has been around, and Elmer Gantry made a great living since long before that. But to run the bakery scam, you have to get in on the ground floor. Pretty soon, the number of bigots claiming the government is depriving them of their religious freedom will be old news, too many for even dedicated "god is for sale if you pay enough" folks to keep coughing up for.

[abasin]

Bigotry has a strong following.

Usually the same following as stupidity.

[peterson33]

Usually the same following as stupidity.

But you can fool some of the people all of the time. Enough of them, anyway, to retire in luxury.

[rajaaziz]

Televangelist scammers have been grabbing people by their Jesus and shaking money out of them for as long as broadcasting has been around, and Elmer Gantry made a great living since long before that. But to run the bakery scam, you have to get in on the ground floor. Pretty soon, the number of bigots claiming the government is depriving them of their religious freedom will be old news, too many for even dedicated "god is for sale if you pay enough" folks to keep coughing up for.

God is already endorsing dating sites. Now all the church needs is to start selling the endorsements. Maybe they need to sue those who use God as an endorsement without church approval so they can continue to maintain a monopoly. Otherwise God is going to go the way of Kleenex.

[fontana]

Bigotry has a strong following.

It can be a real money maker.

I was never aware that there were any sects that had taboos about cake baking.

[rio3232]

Now who looks like the victim and who the beneficiary of this brouhaha. If I need to pay off my debtors, I'll become a bigot with a bible and watch the cash roll in.

I don't think the little bakery asked, nor wanted, to be sued. But you believe whatever you want.

[rio3232]

It can be a real money maker.

I was never aware that there were any sects that had taboos about cake baking.

How so? Are you suggesting their actions had the motive of wanting to invite a lawsuit so they could raise money by donations?

Don't answer. You always come up with some phoney baloney fairy tales.

[Valonib]

I don't think the little bakery asked, nor wanted, to be sued. But you believe whatever you want.

That bakery did not ask or want to be sued. They just got lucky. The next one will include it in the five year plan for solvency.

[arul.BP]

Good luck with that. (Save your money, though).

Religious belief is not an excuse for breaking the law.

The SCOTUS has ruled on this in the past, it probably won't do so again.

Render unto Caesar.

yeah, well, given the choice of following my beliefs and giving to Caesar.... Caesar can kiss my ass and I'll gladly go to jail for the pleasure if it.


If that 'little bakery' was owned by muslims, the ACLU would have defended them to the death.

[fontana]

I would only condemn a cake baker to eternal torment for pineapple-pistachio, but anyone is free to make up this own particular "religious" taboos to fit his agenda, apparently.

[Namviet]

I can only hope Aaron and Melissa Klein file suit against the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries for violating their 1st Amendment and Civil Rights under the Civil Rights Act.

They broke existing law and are on the hook for it.

The time and place to protest this abomination of protected class for gay sex was long ago. GTF out of Oregon and similar lefitist craphole states. Thhe blue states are long gone and unfixable.

And let's all vote VAGINA '16 to put the killing blow on America.

[rio3232]

And let's all vote VAGINA '16 to put the killing blow on America.

Oh......another sarcastic vote for the Cankle Monster herself. With the way things are going, I think Barry Hussein will have already driven the last nail in America's coffin long before she would step to the podium.

[tomor]

I love how progressives label people bigots for following their religion... It shows how limited their brains are.