XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.society.liberalism   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.republican   
   From: traRvEskyMOVE@hotmail.com   
      
   Joe Cooper wrote:   
   > Is this a case of religious freedom? Or unlawful discrimination?   
   > The state of Oregon says if you run a business, you've got to serve gays   
   > even it goes against your religious principles. So when a gay couple   
   > wanted to order a wedding cake from Sweet Cakes bakery, the owner, a   
   > devout Christian, refused.   
   >   
   > The couple sued and the Oregon state Bureau of Labor and Industries,   
   > after conducting an investigation, ruled that the bakery had to serve the   
   > gay couple.   
   >   
   > Welcome to America in 2013:   
   >   
   >         On Aug. 14, Oregon's state Bureau of Labor and Industries reported   
   > its investigation to determine if Sweet Cakes' actions violated the   
   > Oregon Equality Act of 2007, which states that people cannot be denied   
   > service based on sexual orientation. The law provides an exemption for   
   > schools and religious groups, but not for private businesses, according   
   > to a BOLI news release.   
   >   
   >         Since 2007, Oregonians have filed 11 complaints of unlawful   
   > discrimination in public places under the 2007 equality law. BOLI found   
   > no substantial evidence in five of those complaints but parties   
   > negotiated settlements in three other cases, including one this past week   
   > where a bar was fined $400K for keeping transgenders away.   
   >   
   >         The Sweet Cakes case is still being reviewed by BOLI investigators   
   > as of Aug. 30.   
   >   
   >         A note on the shop's Gresham door Sunday said the following:   
   >   
   >         "This fight is not over. We will continue to stand strong. Your   
   > Religious Freedom is becoming not Free anymore. This is ridiculous that   
   > we can not practice our faith. The LORD is good and we will continue to   
   > serve Him with all our heart. ?"   
   >   
   > Note that the bakery owner is not being charged with refusing to serve   
   > gay people, but is accused of refusing to take a contract for a wedding   
      
   It most certainly is a case of refusing to serve. No religious freedom   
   issue at all.   
      
   > cake - a wedding that they see as illegitimate regardless of what the law   
   > says.   
   >   
   > If a gay couple came into the store and wanted to buy some donuts or   
   > bread, and were refused service, that is what the law was supposed to   
   > prevent. But that's not the case here and this unilateral expansion of   
   > the definition of the law infringes on the religious freedom of the   
   > owner.   
   >   
   > Not that Oregonian authorities care much because some freedoms are freer   
   > than others.   
   >   
   > Source:   
   > http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/09/oregon_bakery_that_refused_to   
   > _make_gay_wedding_cake_closes_its_store.html   
      
   What next? Refusing to serve blacks because of some bullcrap aboutthe Mark   
   of Cain or something?   
      
   Your kind would like that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)