Bakers face $135,000 fine for refusing to make cake for gay wedding

[TimberWolf]

Marjorie Silva, owner of Azucar Bakery

CREDIT: AP PHOTO/IVAN MORENO

I wonder what drew her to the cake business in the first place

[D-Money]

Even though they are Christian and do not support gay marriage, they should still be able to make a cake and sell it. How the consumer uses the cake is up to them.

There's a biblical example to support this: One of the most serious sins for the nation of Israel was/is the consuming of blood. God declared that the soul of all life was in the blood, and it was to be held sacred. All meat had to be properly bled before eating. They were not to eat an animal that was found dead, as it was no longer possible to bleed it properly. The sentence for any Israelite who willfully ignored this law was death. (Leviticus 7:22-26; 17:10-14)

So what were the Israelites supposed to do with an animal that was found dead?

"Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to the foreigner residing in any of your towns, and they may eat it, or you may sell it to any other foreigner." (Deuteronomy 14:21)

Just because the Israelites' beliefs forbade them from not partaking of this animal, they were not expected to force others to also obey. And God did not expect them to suffer financially to ensure others were not eating unbled meat. They were told to just sell it, or simply give it away. What the buyer/receiver did with it was their business. Just because eating it would be offensive to an Israelite, didn't mean they had to project that to people who didn't believe the same.

Similarly, if people are involved in something offensive to your beliefs, but aren't hurting you or anyone else, let them be. If they want to buy something you sell, and use it for whatever - that is their business. Whether you sell wedding cakes, cars that drive to and from the wedding, or beds they go home to after...just sell your stuff, and let people use it how they see fit. You don't have to answer for them.

[Angry Goose]

I don't think people get that it is an issue about more than just a cake- it has to do with unjust discrimination. Sure, businesses can refuse service for a variety of justified reasons, but arbitrary discrimination i.e race/gender/sexual orientation etc are not one of them. Recall when black people were refused entry into certain stores? Same thing. It is unjust. Times are a changin people, time to get with the program.

[canuktravella]

IMO, yes.

Hunting is legal and although offensive to some, certainly not grounds for refusing to serve someone.

the problem killing things is legal and marrying someone in certains places is illegal the worlds so skewed

[Langdon Algur]

 

No one has pointed the other side of the coin. Take this example: Does a Jewish printing company has the right to refuse to print a Neo Nazi Poster denying the Holocaust? Would it be discrimination if such a situation occured?

 

One act would be committing a hate crime the other is baking a cake for a wedding, how can you honestly compare the two?

[McBackup]

I'm honestly baffled the way some people are reacting to this. Are the bakers idiots? Absolutely. But fining someone $135,000 for not baking someone a cake is insane. Last I checked they are not the only place in the world that sells wedding cakes, and they should have the right to choose their clientele, even if it is based on stupid ideology.

[RUPERTKBD]

the problem killing things is legal and marrying someone in certains places is illegal the worlds so skewed

Preaching to the choir, my friend.

Ask anyone that I've squared off with in any of the myriad guns threads on CDC over the years. I absolutely abhor guns and would be happy if it were illegal to possess them. However, I realize that it's wishful thinking.

Bear in mind I have several very good friends who are avid hunters, including the guitar player in my band.

[RUPERTKBD]

I'm honestly baffled the way some people are reacting to this. Are the bakers idiots? Absolutely. But fining someone $135,000 for not baking someone a cake is insane. Last I checked they are not the only place in the world that sells wedding cakes, and they should have the right to choose their clientele, even if it is based on stupid ideology.

Many disagree with this assertion, including, in this case the courts.

[thejazz97]

.

[thejazz97]

I'm honestly baffled the way some people are reacting to this. Are the bakers idiots? Absolutely. But fining someone $135,000 for not baking someone a cake is insane. Last I checked they are not the only place in the world that sells wedding cakes, and they should have the right to choose their clientele, even if it is based on stupid ideology.

Many disagree with this assertion, including, in this case the courts.

[McBackup]

Many disagree with this assertion, including, in this case the courts.

I'm well aware of that. That was the entire point of my post, that these people are insane.

[BabychStache]

Who the heck gets the $135k?

How the heck does anyone justify this?

Forget the issue at hand, the real crook here is the lawyer that encouraged this couple to proceed with this BS.

[thejazz97]

Who the heck gets the $135k?

How the heck does anyone justify this?

Forget the issue at hand, the real crook here is the lawyer that encouraged this couple to proceed with this BS.

Don't worry, the lawyers of the couple were pushing for $150k.

[RUPERTKBD]

Who the heck gets the $135k?

How the heck does anyone justify this?

Forget the issue at hand, the real crook here is the lawyer that encouraged this couple to proceed with this BS.

People really need to get over the amount of money awarded. There's little chance of the plaintiff collecting that much.

What people don't seem to understand is that this couple's civil rights were violated. So they sued. They were awarded damages, because the courts agreed that the bakers were in the wrong.

Yes, $135k is a lot of money, but what else are they going to ask for?

An apology? I doubt that it would be sincere.

A Cake? A bit late for that.

The fact is, the damages awarded needed to be significant, otherwise every other backwards thinking bible puncher would be doing the same thing. With this suit in mind, they're either going to serve whomever comes into their store, or stay out of the retail business altogether.

Either way, the rest of us win.

[McBackup]

People really need to get over the amount of money awarded. There's little chance of the plaintiff collecting that much.

What people don't seem to understand is that this couple's civil rights were violated. So they sued. They were awarded damages, because the courts agreed that the bakers were in the wrong.

Yes, $135k is a lot of money, but what else are they going to ask for?

An apology? I doubt that it would be sincere.

A Cake? A bit late for that.

The fact is, the damages awarded needed to be significant, otherwise every other backwards thinking bible puncher would be doing the same thing. With this suit in mind, they're either going to serve whomever comes into their store, or stay out of the retail business altogether.

Either way, the rest of us win.

Yeah, I certainly feel like a winner.

The way to stop discrimination is to stop patronizing those establishments, not force them to serve people they don't want to. If you think the people that were going to be discriminating against gays in the first place are going to be more happy about serving them now they're forced to, you're delusional. If anything this is going to make them far more bitter.

[aGENT]

Last I checked they are not the only place in the world that sells wedding cakes, and they should have the right to choose their clientele, even if it is based on stupid ideology.

No they shouldn't. That's precisely why we have discrimination laws so people can't go around refusing service to people of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation etc.

[McBackup]

No they shouldn't.

Yes they should.

[RUPERTKBD]

Yeah, I certainly feel like a winner.

The way to stop discrimination is to stop patronizing those establishments, not force them to serve people they don't want to. If you think the people that were going to be discriminating against gays in the first place are going to be more happy about serving them now they're forced to, you're delusional. If anything this is going to make them far more bitter.

Speaking of delusional...

They won't be "forced" to do anything. They're out of business as they should be.

[RUPERTKBD]

I'm well aware of that. That was the entire point of my post, that these people are insane.

The way to stop discrimination is to stop patronizing those establishments,

Yes they should.

1950 called. It wants it's attitude back.

[McBackup]

Speaking of delusional...

They won't be "forced" to do anything. They're out of business as they should be.

Last I checked coercion is forcing people to do things.

1950 called. It wants it's attitude back.

Nice ad hominem there champ.