Christian Bakers Fined, Gagged in Gay Cake Case

[Thiscrosshurts]

depends on how thick they lay on the fondant, I guess.

If a cake maker advertises that they are christian focused then they should not be expected to offer services they never intended to or have to find special suppliers for or even if they feel it is in poor taste and may harm their reputation.
Businesses are dumping Donald Trump and they have good reason,he is poisoning his own brand.

In my business I refuse to do shoddy or unsafe work or any work I feel might harm my reputation among the clientele I seek to develop a relationship with.
Should a christian bakery be forced to make little ***** cakes for a woman's bachelorette party?
Cake making can be considered an art form by some bakers so unless they advertise that they make any type of cake for any occasion I think any business has the right to disengage with a consumer that wants something that the artisan never had any intention or perhaps even ability to supply.
Or anything that the artisan feels is in poor taste like nazi symbols or even rebel flags.

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

No shoes, no shirt, no service is a non-prejudicial policy. But refusing service to blacks, Jews and Irish is.

I think this is what it boils down to.
If the bakery said "no we can't make that cake" and then said "and you can't buy anything on display".
Then that would be discrimination.
But if the customer is allowed to purchase anything that anyone else is allowed to purchase then it is not discrimination.
If the customer was refused the "gray" wedding cake but was able to order a birthday cake or a regular wedding cake for any reason
then I think it would be difficult to prove discrimination.
If the Baker sold a "gray" wedding cake to one customer but not another then that would be discrimination.

Either way the market forces will provide lots of "gray" wedding cakes if their is a demand and the standard cake maker would soon go out of business if the world goes gray.

 

[Kirby D. P.]

If a cake maker advertises that they are christian focused then they should not be expected to offer services they never intended to or have to find special suppliers for or even if they feel it is in poor taste and may harm their reputation.
Businesses are dumping Donald Trump and they have good reason,he is poisoning his own brand.

In my business I refuse to do shoddy or unsafe work or any work I feel might harm my reputation among the clientele I seek to develop a relationship with.
Should a christian bakery be forced to make little ***** cakes for a woman's bachelorette party?
Cake making can be considered an art form by some bakers so unless they advertise that they make any type of cake for any occasion I think any business has the right to disengage with a consumer that wants something that the artisan never had any intention or perhaps even ability to supply.
Or anything that the artisan feels is in poor taste like nazi symbols or even rebel flags.

Again, I am not insisting that bakers be forced to do anything. I am asserting that refusing to serve homosexuals while providing service to masturbators or sexually active singles is unChristian and that defending such discriminatory policy as a demonstration of Christian faith and morals is hypocritical. If you were a business person in the South at the turn of the century, even if you weren't racist, you could reasonably (though not ethically) claim that you refused service to blacks because it would hurt your relationship with your more lucrative white clientele. But you could not blame Christ or your love of God for such discriminatory behavior.

 

[Shutterbug]

I wish I knew more about this story because I have a feeling that the point of this conversation is more about behaviour generally speaking than Christian or Worldly ethics. If the bakery was not the only shop in town, there is no reasonable excuse for the wannabe couple to go elsewhere. If so, then they also have a behavioural issue. Instead of going elsewhere, the couple made an incident of Biblical proportions to make that bakery suffer for hurting their pride. Kirby, you keep talking about Christian behaviour and ethics based on Biblical guidelines. What about the conduct of the couple? Did they show mature behaviour even by standards of common sense? Nope. Instead, they threw a major tantrum like spoiled kids not getting their way. Phillippians 4:8 says it all. How did you get to be an expert on something you can't make up your mind about based on your own rebellion? You can't have it both ways, my friend. Are you for Jesus or are you against him? Or, are you still trying to decide which way to go?

I'm not homophobic simply because I consider men getting laid by other men disgusting. I will say for the record and the simple fact is that Gay men are undeniably gynophobic as they have no desire to be with women.

Cheers,
John

 

[RJ]

Giving to Caesar that which is Caesar's is precisely my point. It is not for the bakers to execute any part of God's justice. No shoes, no shirt, no service is a non-prejudicial policy. But refusing service to blacks, Jews and Irish is. The laws of the land are wordly and inconsequential in Heaven. So what Christian good did the bakers think they were performing? They were not abiding any particular scripture. You can't find a quote from them that, "Gosh, we really, REALLY would have loved to sell the lesbians a cake, honest. But God says we can't." The bakers find homosexuality offensive. That gay sex is sinful simply provides an excuse for them to give manifest vent to their bigotry.

I suppose you are a Liberal / Progressive?

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

Again, I am not insisting that bakers be forced to do anything. I am asserting that refusing to serve homosexuals while providing service to masturbators or sexually active singles is unChristian and that defending such discriminatory policy as a demonstration of Christian faith and morals is hypocritical. If you were a business person in the South at the turn of the century, even if you weren't racist, you could reasonably (though not ethically) claim that you refused service to blacks because it would hurt your relationship with your more lucrative white clientele. But you could not blame Christ or your love of God for such discriminatory behavior.

I must admit i never read more than the headlines,if they refused them service(can't buy the muffins on display) that they offer everyone then there was discrimination.
But if they deny a service that they don't provide anyone else then it would seem difficult to claim discrimination.
I'm still wondering where they would get the little grooms though since no one might make them yet.
And I would not expect them to saw two pairs of little bride and grooms apart to get two grooms or two brides and create a new thing because that would be substandard.

This whole thing could only be more absurd if the headline had read"Christian Bakers spanked and Gagged in Gay Cake Case".

 

[mikej]

And bless you, Br. Bear. You are absolutely right on several scores. For the record, I'll restate my policy: in principle, I'll sell you a cake even if you are a homosexual or a nonviolent homophobe. But I'll stop short of making this an absolute rule in allowance of certain unforeseeable circumstances.

HOWEVER, while 'tis true cake is a relatively innocuous trade, at the other absurd end of the spectrum are things like medical care, police protection, access to vital public services. Most everything else falls somewhere in the vast middle. And while selective provision of these services is subject to certain political or legal debate, it's virtually impossible to identify the defining point when prejudicially withholding a service is "more" Christian than providing that service without prejudice. This is because there IS no Christian point at which a service becomes so inconsequential as to render making a point of witholding it admirable.
Many Christian charities provide food and medical aid to the poor of Somalia. Most of the recipients of this largesse are Muslims, many of whom come from families who have waged war against Christians. The charity they recieve is very Christian in nature. How does one reconcile the magnificence of that charitable expression of Christianity with the petty refusal to sell a cake to a pair of women who, for all we know, donate freely to that charity in Africa.

It is safe to assume God sorrows over any sinning sex the lesbian couple engage in. It is safe to assume He rejoices in Christians providing succor to the children of their own enemies in Africa. Is it likely that he smiles when a baker says, "You're gay, so no cake for you. Go away."?

The problem alway will be a condition exceptable to God. With great swelling words of vanity the condition will never be met.anyone can simply be good, nice or charitable this is only one condition. Grace is more clearly defined as a opportunity not so much as a endless supply of forgiveness.This brings Lasiviousness because of the missunderstanding of Grace using love to excuse unacceptable behavior that God clearly stated was filthynesss how do you change that but with your imagination .

 

[Kirby D. P.]

I wish I knew more about this story because I have a feeling that the point of this conversation is more about behaviour generally speaking than Christian or Worldly ethics. If the bakery was not the only shop in town, there is no reasonable excuse for the wannabe couple to go elsewhere. If so, then they also have a behavioural issue. Instead of going elsewhere, the couple made an incident of Biblical proportions to make that bakery suffer for hurting their pride. Kirby, you keep talking about Christian behaviour and ethics based on Biblical guidelines. What about the conduct of the couple? Did they show mature behaviour even by standards of common sense? Nope. Instead, they threw a major tantrum like spoiled kids not getting their way. Phillippians 4:8 says it all. How did you get to be an expert on something you can't make up your mind about based on your own rebellion? You can't have it both ways, my friend. Are you for Jesus or are you against him? Or, are you still trying to decide which way to go?

I'm not homophobic simply because I consider men getting laid by other men disgusting. I will say for the record and the simple fact is that Gay men are undeniably gynophobic as they have no desire to be with women.

Cheers,
John

For the record, I don't consider men having sex with men disgusting because I simply don't consider it at all. If you find the thought of having sex with another man unappealing, that indeed doesn't make you homophobic. It simply makes you straight. Your assertion that gay men are undeniably gynephobic is bald, bold and in bad need of substantiation.

However, my points in this conversation are as follows:
1. Gay sex and lust (gay or straight) are both sins.
2. The lesbian couple were not enlisting the bakers to aid, support or endorse either the sin of gay sex or carnal lust. They wanted a cake for a ceremony marking their love for each other.
3. When the bakers refused to sell the cake in question, they claimed it was because the sinful nature of the lesbians' relationship was an affront to their Christian faith. We don't know that the lesbian couple commit the sins of gay sex or lust, but we DO KNOW, FOR A FACT, that EVERY cake the bakers make is sold to a sinner. To single out the lesbians for special discrimination based on Christian doctrine is, by definition, hypocritical. If they sell any cakes to anyone who lusts, or has committed adultery, or been divorced, etc, etc. they cannot deny the lesbians service without engaging in hypocrisy ACCORDING TO JESUS. Perhaps they actually refused the lesbians service because they found homosexuality personally disgusting and were merely using "religion" as an excuse to act on that sense of revulsion. Since there is no Christian doctrine to ostracize sinners (because then we would ALL be ostracized) simply because they are sinners, then the bakers' actions are a subject for consideration under civil, i.e. "Caesar's" law. As such, under civil law, the response of the lesbian couple was not some childish temper tantrum, but a reasonable complaint just as are complaints against restricted country clubs and racist real estate dealings. The act of witholding service was not a Christian act. And people who support the bakers in their prejudiced policy out of religious conviction are misguided. This is very much a question of Christian principles, not merely one of social justice.

 

[RJ]

For the record, I don't consider men having sex with men disgusting because I simply don't consider it at all. If you find the thought of having sex with another man unappealing, that indeed doesn't make you homophobic. It simply makes you straight. Your assertion that gay men are undeniably gynephobic is bald, bold and in bad need of substantiation.

However, my points in this conversation are as follows:
1. Gay sex and lust (gay or straight) are both sins.
2. The lesbian couple were not enlisting the bakers to aid, support or endorse either the sin of gay sex or carnal lust. They wanted a cake for a ceremony marking their love for each other.
3. When the bakers refused to sell the cake in question, they claimed it was because the sinful nature of the lesbians' relationship was an affront to their Christian faith. We don't know that the lesbian couple commit the sins of gay sex or lust, but we DO KNOW, FOR A FACT, that EVERY cake the bakers make is sold to a sinner. To single out the lesbians for special discrimination based on Christian doctrine is, by definition, hypocritical. If they sell any cakes to anyone who lusts, or has committed adultery, or been divorced, etc, etc. they cannot deny the lesbians service without engaging in hypocrisy ACCORDING TO JESUS. Perhaps they actually refused the lesbians service because they found homosexuality personally disgusting and were merely using "religion" as an excuse to act on that sense of revulsion. Since there is no Christian doctrine to ostracize sinners (because then we would ALL be ostracized) simply because they are sinners, then the bakers' actions are a subject for consideration under civil, i.e. "Caesar's" law. As such, under civil law, the response of the lesbian couple was not some childish temper tantrum, but a reasonable complaint just as are complaints against restricted country clubs and racist real estate dealings. The act of witholding service was not a Christian act. And people who support the bakers in their prejudiced policy out of religious conviction are misguided. This is very much a question of Christian principles, not merely one of social justice.

Do you think that every Christian church should accept unrepentant homosexuals into their congregation?

 

[RJ]

For the record, I don't consider men having sex with men disgusting because I simply don't consider it at all.

As a Christian, have you ever considered what God thinks about it?

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings ,

@Kirby D. P.
Forgive me please as I know very, very little about what exactly happened or what has been reported and honestly am not at all interested in finding out** but from what what you are saying I must agree with what I think you are saying.

The question is, though, does it matter what I think and if so, why?
I remember not all that long ago helping a lesbian pair and their children move house and that, after repairing their trailer after attending a local church meeting one day.
I had no idea at that time that the females I was helping were in a relationship together but I did know that helping someone fix bearings on their vehicle was OK and I didn't get any grease on my shirt. When I heard that there was a need with shifting a house full of belongings I offered to assist. These people were amazed as I had never met them before. A few days later, when the time came to load the removal truck and I began heaving furniture around and loading boxes of the children's things, I realized that the adults were what is singled out and classified as lesbian.
I had already engaged in conversation with all of them and was being as chivalrous as possible to women attempting to lift weighty objects as is generally accepted behaviour in some cultures.
I went with the truck with the two women, three persons in the cab.
I was able to talk and listen and breathe the same air as well as body odours (it was a hot time!) and we engaged together in discussion about Jesus Christ during which time I will able to clarify some misunderstandings and quite beautifully, opportunity kept arising to keep pointing out things already said, driving the points home, so to speak. What I realized afterwards was that my actions were proving my words and that these two women were able to hear the Gospel in a way that nobody would have dreamt of. The youngsters were happy to yap and have someone help thoughtfully with their belongings and to make me a cuppa from time to time and I was able to share with them also some gospel and some kindness and some elderly advice about all sorts of things. I remember now that they wanted me to take their photo in front of the house they were
leaving (the new house was 50 odd miles away) and to get them to smile for the shot I said, everyone say Jesus! and with gladness they all did!

I know that when I first realized that the two women were lovers, I said to the LORD, OK, thank you for this opportunity to be the Christian I want to be!
The women wanted to pay me something for my help but I insisted that I couldn't accept any money from them.
They knew why - we had spoken a lot about what Jesus taught regarding doing kindness and doing it for love (they had been constantly asking me why I was being so helpful because they'd never come across anyone who was willing to help without looking to gain.)
I was so glad to be helping people and their children with an obvious need and I was not ashamed to be seen doing so.

I don't know how they are all doing and what sort of way they are walking now but I know Who does.

I might have failed the LORD and these people because I didn't witness them becoming Christian.
I know that I was squeezed into a front seat of a truck with two people who had all the normal baggage that people acquire. Two individuals who had problems and pains, fears and failures and were like so many, trying to get relationship right in this self seeking, greedy, hate filled world .
I also remember once helping an elderly widow who was rebuilding her life and literally building a house. I was her carpenter of choice and to be very honest, it was a remote area so there weren't too many to choose from!!!
I refused to help her after some time as she wanted me to do two things, one, to use a timber which the termites in that region would have walked a mile for and the other was that she wanted me to use second hand heavily toxic poles as feature points in the strawbale house she was building. I refused.
She was a professing Christian.
I was not asked to do any more on that job and she got someone else to do it.
I'm not sure what ever happened to her or her house but I know Who does.
I may have failed the LORD and the widow but I do not feel as concerned about her as I do about the two women and their children.

So, in every time and nation people face challenges to what is considered acceptable and many a trouble has come from people doing it the 'wrong' way.
Another sad fact is that had the baker gone ahead, the self-righteous would throw stones at him saying he was assisting and encouraging and partaking in great sin and that he is headed for hell, that he should have refused (regardless of what Jesus taught)

Psalm 85:10 Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.

Bless you ....><>

(**I have not read through this thread from start to finish)

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

3. When the bakers refused to sell the cake in question, they claimed it was because the sinful nature of the lesbians' relationship was an affront to their Christian faith.

That does sound like discrimination but there are still details lacking.
Adultery and divorce cause more damage to the family unit than any other factor I can think of at the moment so it does surprise me that these bakeries might be supporting the sin of divorce and remarriage that Jesus specifically confronted by offering cakes to those getting married a second or third time.

 

[Kirby D. P.]

D

Do you think that every Christian church should accept unrepentant homosexuals into their congregation?

Do you think any congregation should shun any child among its fold who has homosexual thoughts? If not, which congregation is allowed to judge which parishioner is or is not one of God's children?

 

[Kirby D. P.]

B

Greetings ,

@Kirby D. P.
Forgive me please as I know very, very little about what exactly happened or what has been reported and honestly am not at all interested in finding out** but from what what you are saying I must agree with what I think you are saying.

The question is, though, does it matter what I think and if so, why?
I remember not all that long ago helping a lesbian pair and their children move house and that, after repairing their trailer after attending a local church meeting one day.
I had no idea at that time that the females I was helping were in a relationship together but I did know that helping someone fix bearings on their vehicle was OK and I didn't get any grease on my shirt. When I heard that there was a need with shifting a house full of belongings I offered to assist. These people were amazed as I had never met them before. A few days later, when the time came to load the removal truck and I began heaving furniture around and loading boxes of the children's things, I realized that the adults were what is singled out and classified as lesbian.
I had already engaged in conversation with all of them and was being as chivalrous as possible to women attempting to lift weighty objects as is generally accepted behaviour in some cultures.
I went with the truck with the two women, three persons in the cab.
I was able to talk and listen and breathe the same air as well as body odours (it was a hot time!) and we engaged together in discussion about Jesus Christ during which time I will able to clarify some misunderstandings and quite beautifully, opportunity kept arising to keep pointing out things already said, driving the points home, so to speak. What I realized afterwards was that my actions were proving my words and that these two women were able to hear the Gospel in a way that nobody would have dreamt of. The youngsters were happy to yap and have someone help thoughtfully with their belongings and to make me a cuppa from time to time and I was able to share with them also some gospel and some kindness and some elderly advice about all sorts of things. I remember now that they wanted me to take their photo in front of the house they were
leaving (the new house was 50 odd miles away) and to get them to smile for the shot I said, everyone say Jesus! and with gladness they all did!

I know that when I first realized that the two women were lovers, I said to the LORD, OK, thank you for this opportunity to be the Christian I want to be!
The women wanted to pay me something for my help but I insisted that I couldn't accept any money from them.
They knew why - we had spoken a lot about what Jesus taught regarding doing kindness and doing it for love (they had been constantly asking me why I was being so helpful because they'd never come across anyone who was willing to help without looking to gain.)
I was so glad to be helping people and their children with an obvious need and I was not ashamed to be seen doing so.

I don't know how they are all doing and what sort of way they are walking now but I know Who does.

I might have failed the LORD and these people because I didn't witness them becoming Christian.
I know that I was squeezed into a front seat of a truck with two people who had all the normal baggage that people acquire. Two individuals who had problems and pains, fears and failures and were like so many, trying to get relationship right in this self seeking, greedy, hate filled world .
I also remember once helping an elderly widow who was rebuilding her life and literally building a house. I was her carpenter of choice and to be very honest, it was a remote area so there weren't too many to choose from!!!
I refused to help her after some time as she wanted me to do two things, one, to use a timber which the termites in that region would have walked a mile for and the other was that she wanted me to use second hand heavily toxic poles as feature points in the strawbale house she was building. I refused.
She was a professing Christian.
I was not asked to do any more on that job and she got someone else to do it.
I'm not sure what ever happened to her or her house but I know Who does.
I may have failed the LORD and the widow but I do not feel as concerned about her as I do about the two women and their children.

So, in every time and nation people face challenges to what is considered acceptable and many a trouble has come from people doing it the 'wrong' way.
Another sad fact is that had the baker gone ahead, the self-righteous would throw stones at him saying he was assisting and encouraging and partaking in great sin and that he is headed for hell, that he should have refused (regardless of what Jesus taught)

Psalm 85:10 Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.

Bless you ....><>

(**I have not read through this thread from start to finish)

Bless you. If I were the people you describe and I met you under those circumstances, I think I would certainly feel armed and inspired to resist sin.

 

[Kirby D. P.]

That does sound like discrimination but there are still details lacking.
Adultery and divorce cause more damage to the family unit than any other factor I can think of at the moment so it does surprise me that these bakeries might be supporting the sin of divorce and remarriage that Jesus specifically confronted by offering cakes to those getting married a second or third time.

True enough. The only sin of abomination I can think of as being singled out for unique condemnation is denunciation of the Holy Spirit. The particular demonization of homosexuality by the same culture that celebrates so many other permutations of wantonness smacks of convenient fashion and scapegoating.

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings,

Do you mean like straining at gnats and swallowing camels?

Bless you ....><>

 

[Kirby D. P.]

Greetings,

Do you mean like straining at gnats and swallowing camels?

Bless you ....><>

Yup. And offering to remove a speck of wood from your brothers eye while you have a plank in yours. (I keep forgetting to draw a cartoon of that. Genius imagery. Obviously. )

 

[Fragrant Grace]

This couple made a stand for their Christian beliefs....not wanting to make a cake to celebrate a marriage union between two women.

They don't say anywhere in any article (that Ive read) that they hate lesbians or gays.....but just that making a specific cake for this specific union would be wrong.

May the Lord bless them for making a stand for the Lord...they have been far more persecuted than the gay couple


"I can't say it more forcefully," Aaron continued, "what it came down to was that [my wife] has a God-given talent to create a work of art to celebrate a union between two people. And to use that in a manner that would be in the face of what the Bible says it should be, I just couldn't in good conscience agree to do it."

Shortly before the couple was forced out of business in 2013, Aaron said he had apologized for wasting the lesbian couple's time and explained that they don't participate in same-sex marriages based on religious grounds. "(I) honestly did not mean to hurt anybody, didn't mean to make anybody upset, (it's) just something I believe in very strongly."

One harassing email the couple received in June 2014 reads: "You stupid Bible thumping, hypocritical [expletive]. I hope your kids get really, really, sick and you go out of business."

Christian Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Wedding Found Guilty of Discrimination; Will Have to Pay Up to $150K

Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong
1 Corinthians 16:13

 

[Brad Huber]

How, exactly, does my insistence that I would sell the lesbians a wedding cake AND ALSO sell the bakers a wedding cake, even though they needlessly find the lesbians' relationship disgusting, show that I know so little about love? They can find no scripture to justify their persecution of female couples who want to buy a wedding cake and I have no scriptural basis for penalizing them for disparaging homosexuality. But I DO have scriptural basis to see their persecution of the lesbian couple as unChristian. You'll note that nowhere have I said that the bakers SHOULD be gagged or fined over $100,000. I am simply describing them and people who support their position as hypocrites. Also, I think you'll see I have kept my own aversion to gay sex, homosexual romantic love, or the sins of lust or adultery out of my analysis. Furthermore, I'd never presume to tell you what you do and do not know about love without first hearing your own opinions of it. I am not here professing or judging the validity of anyone's love. I don't doubt the Christian bakers love God. But they cannot defend their persecution of the lesbian couple as a way of demonstrating that love. It's a non sequitur.

It is truly not persecution to refuse bake a cake for someone. How is it that you would think this? Do you not understand what persecution truly is? I think not. If I had a business and dedicated it to the Lord and had promised to only use it for good and serve Him with it, there might be a situation that I would do the same. If a gay person came into my business and wanted a cake done, that was a normal cake, and picked it up, then no problem, but if they chose me only because I espoused christian values and wanted to shame me and my values by either how the cake was designed, or the message on it, etc, then I would say no. They would be the ones prosecuting me in that case. If your idea of love has become mixed with what the world says it is, then you are walking the wrong path.

 

[RJ]

o you think any congregation should shun any child among its fold who has homosexual thoughts? If not, which congregation is allowed to judge which parishioner is or is not one of God's children?

That is the problem with Liberal ideology, I never said anything about homosexual thoughts, now did I? We are talking about professing homosexuals. There is no such thing as a homosexual, claiming themselves a Christian, with Jesus Christ in them, and be non-repentant about their sin. A homosexual, struggling with their sin and possessing a repentant heart is a completely different situation.