Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Court Could Force Bakery To Pay $150,000+ For Refusing To Make Same Sex "Wedding" Cake

A hearing in March will determine the amount of damages Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman (now Bowman-Cryer) receive. The married couple are seeking $75,000 each for “emotional, mental, and physical suffering,” along with reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses,according to the Bureau of Labor and Industries report.

Oregon bakery will have to pay lesbian couple up to $150,000 plus reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses for refusing to make "wedding" cake for a same sex "Wedding" based on their religion
This can cost these 2 bakers more than $150,000 (court decision)
A lesbian couple filed a discrimination suit against the Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery in Gresham when the owners refused to make them a wedding cake, citing their obvious religious beliefs. The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries determined on Monday that the bakers "discriminated" against the couple showing once again that gay "rights" trump religious rights.

from the summary of the court decision, worthy of impeaching him

An Oregon bakery will have to pay a gay "couple" up to $150,000 plus reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses for refusing to violate their religion and bake them a "wedding" cake two years ago, government officials announced Monday.

The Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery in Gresham caught heat in January 2013 when Laurel Bowman said the shop refused to make a cake for her and her fiancée, citing religious objections. Bowman said the co-owner, Aaron Klein, called the gay marriage “an abomination unto the lord,” KGW reported.

Bowman filed a discrimination complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries months later, and the group said on Monday last week it was ruling against the bakery.

Now the bakers could pay up to $75,000 each to Bowman and her "fiancée", with the final amount to be determined in March .

The Bureau of Labor said in a statement that it provides some exemptions in such cases for religious groups, but the bakery didn’t count as one just because of its owners’ beliefs because only organizations have religious rights (for now in a few years they may loose them)
court decision only protects religious institutions

Very important section to understand why this happened
When gay rights laws around the country were designed many religious "leaders" only put in religious exemptions for themselves while allowing private citizens to suffer the consequences.  Back in June '11 when NY State was trying to pass same sex "marriage", instead of Agudas Yisroel lobbying senators to stop the "marriage" bill,  (I was told by an Orthodox Jew who was lobbing in Albany against the bill the 2 weeks before it passed that he didn't see a single person from any of the mainstream organizations his whole time there, He also said that Shmuel Lefkowitz told him that he wasn't lobbying to hard against the bill because he though it was going to pass) Aguda met with Governor Andrew Cuomo (this was confirmed by Chaim Dovid Zweibel) in order to put in protections for religious organizations helping this evil bill pass.   After the "marriage" bill came out the "Orthodox" Union released this insane statement (which I'm sure Agudah agrees with though can't state for political reasons)
Consistent with our tradition and Jewish religious principles, we oppose the redefinition of marriage and the state sanction of same sex marriages. We opposed this legislation and believe it is a mistake to enact it in New York. We do note however that the legislation, as enacted, includes robust protections of religious liberties for organizations including synagogues, schools and social service agencies. For that at least, we are grateful. Just as we, in a democratic, pluralistic society do not seek to impose our religious beliefs on others, same sex marriage, now the law in New York, must not infringe on anyone’s religious liberties. Sadly, in too many states, those acting on their religious beliefs have seen government benefits withheld, government funds, contracts and services denied and privileges such as tax exemptions revoked. New York’s law ensures that will not happen here and employers, social service providers and houses of worship are free to uphold their faith.
We are particularly thankful to the well meaning and passionate advocates on both sides of this issue who recognized the need for such far reaching exemptions. In particular, we thank Governor Cuomo, a staunch supporter of the bill and Senate Majority Leader Skelos, a firm opponent, who worked together to find common ground here. As well, we are grateful to Speaker Silver for agreeing to take up the legislation a second time in the Assembly to ensure these protections were in the final legislation. (OU press

If the NY "Marriage" bill was never taken up a second time it would never have passed (both the senate and the assembly have to pass the same version of the bill and the senate would not pass the assembly's version).  The bill passed the senate by 2 votes and those religious organization exemptions  that agudah fought for were critical to those 2 senators voting for the bill.  (even the New York Times admitted that) it's very likely that if no religious organization (Jewish (Agudah) or Christian) praised the religious exemptions the bill would have failed

Yet we found that those religious exemptions were worthless for individuals like religious farm owners in upstate New York who declined a lesbian couple’s request to hold a "wedding" ceremony on their property have been fined $10,000 and ordered to pay the women $1,500 each.

The bakery shut its doors at the end of 2013 , but the owners continued doing private orders, including one for an anti-gay ministry this is where the daily news put in irrelevant information to make sure that people side with the lesbians . It also continued running a Facebook page under the Sweet Cakes name.

It posted a statement on the page Tuesday: “Even though it seems as if we are being thrown into the Lions den. We will continue to stand for the Lord, our faith will not waiver. We fully trust in our heavenly father. He is able to deliver us from this, but even if He doesn't we are not going to compromise on God's truth in order to appease man.” how come Agudah can't say such a statement

The statement has received more than 3,000 likes. now at 4000
If you have facebook (click this) press like the statement

Last year, the Civil Rights Commission in Colorado ordered a baker to fulfill an order he refused to a same-sex couple. Another baker in Colorado is now being investigated for discrimination after she refused to write anti-gay messages on a customer’s cake.
The person in Colorado had this to say in response to these gay terrorists 

You know, [I’ll serve jail time if] that’s what it takes.  It’s not like I have chosen this team or that team. This is who I am, it’s what I believe.”

(Daily News) highlights our additions

A hearing in March will determine the amount of damages Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman (now Bowman-Cryer) receive. The "married" couple are seeking $75,000 each for “emotional, mental, and physical suffering,” along with reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses,according to the Bureau of Labor and Industries report.

The Kleins shut down their storefront later in 2013 due to the media attention from the case and what Aaron Klein described as a backlash from gay activists. At one point, someone even vandalized their bakery truck. Melissa Klein still bakes cakes from her home for friends.

Harmon, the attorney, said the case’s key element is that Melissa Klein was sculpting customized wedding cakes intended to celebrate specific ceremonies. “We’re not just talking about a bakery where you’re stirring together flour and water and sugar and handing somebody a cupcake,” she said. “She’s creating art. She’s designing things for an event.”

No Americans should have to choose between closing their business and following their religious convictions, Harmon said.
(world mag)

"First Amendment, Constitution. Freedom of religion. I'm free to exercise my religion however I see fit," Aaron Klein said. "If I'm told to make a wedding cake for a same sex marriage, I feel that I'm violating my beliefs. I don't think I should have to do that."


Public backlash caused the bakery closing its doors at the end of 2013 to turn into an ‘in home bakery’, but not without leaving a note reading ‘This fight is not over. We will continue to stand strong. Your Religious Freedom is becoming not Free anymore‘, according to reports.
(gay star news)

The owners of an Oregon bakery who declined to make a cake for a same-sex couple’s "wedding" celebration were found guilty last week of violating the state’s anti-discrimination law.
The bakery owners, Aaron and Melissa Klein of Sweet Cakes By Melissa, contend they were adhering to their Christian beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman.

On Monday, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries announced the couple will have to pay up to $150,000 plus reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses for violating the Oregon Equality Act of 2007.

According to the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, the exact amount will be determined at a follow-up hearing on March 10.

In an earlier interview with The Daily Signal, Aaron said the fine would bankrupt the couple and their five children.

Although the couple maintains that their decision not to design and bake a lesbian couple’s wedding cake was grounded in their constitutionally-protected right to religion, they’re also arguing before the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries that at the time of the alleged discrimination, same-sex "marriage" wasn’t yet legalized in their state.

It wasn’t until months after the Kleins turned away Cryer and Bowman that a federal judge would declare Oregon’s amendment defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman unconstitutional, paving the way for same-sex marriages.

Ironically, the state was in violation of its own anti-discrimination laws,” said Aaron Klein.
so the only reason they lost was because they based their decision on God and not man? (court decision

Charlie Burr, speaking for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, told Portland’s NBC KGW:

Oregonians may not be denied service based on sexual orientation or gender identity Sexual behavior, same sex weddings (both of which have nothing to do with the person). The law provides an exemption for religious organizations and schools, but does not allow private individuals businesses to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

from the court decision (rebuttal to follow)
if this law was interpreted according to the English Language even without first amendments protections the Kleins would be allowed to deny a same sex wedding cake for a variety of reasons.

1. it's not the person they are discriminating against but the action of said person, for example it would still be legal to deny 2 homos a room (because their behavior inside the room) as opposed to a single homo because your not discriminating against the homosexual but against the behavior of homosexuality
even if they would change the law so reason 1, is eliminated
2. it would still be legal not to deny the cake, because I would deny the same cake even if the person who bought the cake was an outsider (lets say a parent of the KLALA not misspelled). and I would grant the cake to a homosexual who bought it for a normal wedding (one of the lesbos in this case previously bought a cake from the Kleins for her mothers wedding)!

Liberal insanity built untop of more liberal insanity

The biggest  rebuttal was  from the same court decision
If the only reason that this falls under the non "discrimination" law is because there is no reason to make a distinction between a person and a "wedding" then this statement makes no sense

 (daily highlights our additions

I spoke with Aaron Klein by telephone Monday night. He told me the judge’s ruling is a miscarriage of justice and an erosion of religious liberty.

They’re trying to push us into the closet for being Christians,” he said.

Klein said it’s time for Americans to take a stand for religious liberty.

The Founding Fathers said we have the inalienable rights given by God — not man,” he said. “Let’s exercise those rights.”

The Kleins’ troubles started in January 2013 when they turned away that lesbian couple. The bakers were relentlessly pummeled in the media. LGBT activists launched protests and boycotts. They tell me their small children even received death threats — simply because they chose to follow the teachings of their faith.

At some point the activists threatened to launch boycotts against any wedding vendor that did business with the Kleins. That turned out to be the death blow to their retail shop. Today, Melissa bakes cakes out of the family’s home.

The question now is how much — if anything — the Kleins will be forced to pay. Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian will decide, and history proves he’s no friend of the Christian bakers.

In 2013, Avakian told The Oregonian that it is the government’s desire was to rehabilitate businesses like the one owned by the Kleins.

“Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn’t mean that folks have the right to discriminate,” he told the newspaper. “The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate.”

Rehabilitate? He wants to ship the Christians off to a government-sanctioned re-education camp?

Aaron Klein told me there will be no reconciliation and there will be no rehabilitation. He and his wife will not back down from their Christian beliefs.

There’s nothing wrong with what we believe,” he said. “It’s a biblical point of view. It’s my faith. It’s my religion.”

Klein said the ruling, which he called “absolutely absurd,” does not surprise him.

“I’ve never seen a government entity use a law to come after somebody because they have a religious view,” he said. “I truly believe Brad Avakian is trying to send a message. I don’t think the constitution of the state of Oregon means anything to these people.”
From the court decision saying it would be a crime to go on TV and say that you will not cater a same sex "wedding

But on the plus side for Sweet Cakes owners, the agency’s prosecutors failed in their attempt to bring charges against them because they "unlawfully communicated a future intention to discriminate based on sexual orientation" in subsequent media interviews. The bureau ruled against the prosecutor on this one charge because they never formally said in an interview that they would do the same thing if it ever came up again, if they would have this false charge would have stuck and they would have been "guilty" of this blood libel also . So the couple who owns the bakery will not be fined even further just for saying that they do not agree with the law and will not comply. How charitable of the bureau.
1. A personalized wedding cake is a view in support of the "Wedding"

2. So there is no right to free speech when it's not for the public at large?

1 comment:

  1. When God Takes Over the Gay Cakes Industry, Guess Who'll Be Frosted!

    The recent Oregon bakery case proves that "sex rights" (NOT found in the First Amendment!) can trump even religious freedom rights (featured FIRST in the First Amendment!) Since gonads are now worshipped more than the God who made them (thanks to the US Supreme Coup's political tyranny which is now fulfilling the predicted repeat of Luke 17's "days of Lot"), Oregon should change its name to "Oregonads"! And everyone should visit Google and indulge in "God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up," "USA - from Puritans to Impure-itans" and "Universal GAYety is Coming."