‘Stupid Bible-Thumping…B**ch’


#1

Be sure to don the headphones (or turn up your speakers) for my follow-up post!:fuming:

Full Title: ‘Stupid Bible-Thumping…Bch’: Bakery That Refused to Make Gay Couple’s Wedding Cake Speaks Out Amid Threats, Economic Woes**

In February, Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, an Oregon-based bakery, found themselves at the center of a media firestorm after refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple’s ceremony. Nearly four months later, the small business continues to receive threatening and harassing phone calls and e-mails, as they grapple with the ongoing fall-out from their controversial decision. This week, they spoke with TheBlaze about the ongoing drama.

It was Jan. 17 when a mother and her daughter showed up at the shop and chatted with Aaron about purchasing a cake; their meeting was short-lived, though. Upon learning that the wedding was for two women, the baker purportedly politely declined service to the women, citing his Christian faith. Aaron apologized, but stayed true to his values.

‘Stupid Bible-Thumping…B**ch’: Bakery That Refused to Make Gay Couple’s Wedding Cake Speaks Out Amid Threats, Economic Woes | TheBlaze.com


#2

:whistle: :whistle:


#3

More proof that progressive are only interesting in shutting up people who disagree with them. In this case, they are attempting to shut down a business who politely said, No and why they said it. A truly respectful person would simply take their business elsewhere and spread the word to not even bother with that business. That is what respectful people do. However, we are talking about progressives here. need I say more.


#4

[quote=“Conservative_Libertarian, post:3, topic:39682”]
More proof that progressive are only interesting in shutting up people who disagree with them. In this case, they are attempting to shut down a business who politely said, No and why they said it. A truly respectful person would simply take their business elsewhere and spread the word to not even bother with that business. That is what respectful people do. However, we are talking about progressives here. need I say more.
[/quote]This only goes to show the gays have an agenda. If I were denied service I would just go somewhere else not try to destroy that business.

I am reminded that when I was worked at the store I dealt with businesses that serviced only business and not retail. Progressives would think it is unfair they could not buy retail from these businesses


#5

And to think that all this hullabaloo could have been avoided if they would have just baked the darn cake, just like the sign on the door said they’d do.

They decided to take a stand against a peaceable member of the community for some petty arbitrary reason. Fine, they then can live with the consequences - that’s what boycotts are about, they’ve been used in private struggles against bigots and other assorted arseholes for centuries. Boycotts are supposed to, at root, express a community’s shame. This business should be ashamed of itself, say the actions of this community. If the business disagrees and wants to fight back, it’s entitled to. But they can always just do what they say they’re in business to do and bake the darn cake.


#6

That’s a wide brush you are painting people with again but, then again, that’s what progressives do.


#7

What broad brush? A broad brush is your painting the victims of discrimination as the villains.


#8

[quote=“Jazzhead, post:5, topic:39682”]
And to think that all this hullabaloo could have been avoided if they would have just baked the darn cake, just like the sign on the door said they’d do.

They decided to take a stand against a peaceable member of the community for some petty arbitrary reason. Fine, they then can live with the consequences - that’s what boycotts are about, they’ve been used in private struggles against bigots and other assorted arseholes for centuries. Boycotts are supposed to, at root, express a community’s shame. This business should be ashamed of itself, say the actions of this community. If the business disagrees and wants to fight back, it’s entitled to. But they can always just do what they say they’re in business to do and bake the darn cake.
[/quote]Yeah, and then next month, they can be forced to bake one for the Abortionist convention, and one for a polygamist wedding, and how about a terrorists funeral.
Face it. People should not have to perform work for someone they do not want to do business with.
A gay couple came in a couple of months ago, and applied for a loan. Their finances were a shambles.
Their debt to income ratio was in the stratosphere, and their history showed a slow payer. I denied their loan, and immediately they began berating me for being a bigot. They came back twice, and even started talking to some of our customers, accusing us of bias. Then, one of our good customers came in. They began to try to convince him that we were bigoted toward gay people. Cody almost laughed himself into the hospital. He then told them he was gay, and several of his gay friends had gotten loans here. He suggested they drop it, and move on.
My company policy prevents me, as does State Law, from such discrimination. But, their first reaction was to hurt our business. And you seem to support such nonsense.


#9

Tiny, the difference is you didn’t discriminate. They didn’t qualify for the loan on the merits. You faced a false accusation. In your scenario, it was the gay couple who acted like arseholes.

The cake store owner really did discriminate. There was no false accusation. His refusal to bake the cake was arbitrary, plainly stated to the customer, and contrary to the sign on his door. The community has the right to boycott such nonsense.


#10

I was just commenting this morning with one of our church members that I’ve noticed that young atheists on line don’t actually debate you. They just hurl insults and mockery.

Jazzhead, you can state that they should have baked the cake, but that is based on your feelings about baking the cake. In a free country, any business should be able to accept or reject business that conflicts with their conscience. Petty arbitrary reason to you. Fundamental compromise of principle to them. If this offends you then sure, they have to deal with the consequence of you as a customer not liking that. But it is one thing to call the baker and tell them. “I think your refusal to bake a cake is petty and arbitrary and I’m taking my business elsewhere.” It’s quite another to call them and say, “Your a stupid Christian bigot and I hope your daughter is raped and your business burned to the ground.”

Thought question: Should a Jewish kosher catering service be forced to cater an Easter ham? Should we even expect them to? Should we be offended if they don’t?


#11

**arbitrary: ** subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one’s discretion: an arbitrary decision.

in other words: individual freedom. But we can’t have that in America, can we?


#12

Excellent question! Of course, the answer is NO.


#13

[quote=“Conservative_Libertarian, post:12, topic:39682”]
Excellent question! Of course, the answer is NO.
[/quote]Bingo


#14

Inapt example. A kosher butcher or caterer doesn’t have ham in stock. Here all the customer wants is a cake, the very cakes the baker sells everyday, to everybody else but - him. Yes, the baker’s actions were petty and arbitrary - and discriminatory. A violation of principle? Please. He’s not being asked to officiate a gay wedding, just bake a cake for it. The Bible doesn’t compel him to be a jerk.


#15

The Bible is arbitrary, what religion are you again? Whether you like it or not the Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman and facilitating any part of a gay “marriage” is going against that.


#16

The Queers know they have no right to demand that anyone work for them, they do these things to gradually shift the narrative until such time as it seems plausible for the State to make all operational decisions for private businesses.

Censorship of ideas and individual self determination is the only tool of the Extreme Left but they are masters at using it, mainly because the only principle most Conservatives will fight for is “not saying anything that will offend a Communist”.

This bakery should have not only refused to serve these Communist Perverts but should have chased them out of the store and down the street, when they complained about this the bakery owners should have complained right back about how no Communist Perverts are welcome in his bakery regardless of whether they express their perversions with the “same sex” or stray dogs in the city park.

You fight those who have declared war on you, the queers are loud, abrasive and demand the property and labor of free men at gunpoint. The moment Conservatives quit worrying about what the Liberals will say about them and start speaking the truth without apology these queers will scurry back into the cesspools they came out of.

Helping the PC crowd censor truth does nothing but insure that these Perverts will wake up every morning even more bold and determined to destroy all of their enemies and the concept of individual Liberty as a whole.

“Bible thumping bitch” is the lying term queers use to describe us, why on earth would we water down the truth to make them more comfortable?


#17

[quote=“Jazzhead, post:9, topic:39682”]
Tiny, the difference is you didn’t discriminate. They didn’t qualify for the loan on the merits. You faced a false accusation. In your scenario, it was the gay couple who acted like arseholes.

The cake store owner really did discriminate. There was no false accusation. His refusal to bake the cake was arbitrary, plainly stated to the customer, and contrary to the sign on his door. The community has the right to boycott such nonsense.
[/quote]No, the point is that even though I didn’t discriminate, they acted as if I did. They attacked a business, and tried to damage us, because they don’t know how to pay their bills.
But, a conservative should respect the rights of a business to decide who they want to do business with, and who they don’t. I mean c’mon man! A man stands up for his principles, and you act like he burned a cross in their yard. You don’t have to agree with his principles, to support his right to follow them.
I know I know, you think we must all serve the gay community. You don’t seem to care about anyone’s right to their own religion. Well, I will never call gay people normal, and I will never subscribe to “Born This way”. “Born this way” sounds like they wouldn’t want to be gay, but they can’t help it.


#18

Lets modify my “inapt example.”

Now the Jewish kosher catering service is requested to serve items already on their menu… - to the annual Illinois Nazi convention.

I assume by your logic, if they refuse, this is an arbitrary decision which wrongly discriminates against the Illinois Nazis.


#19

Here is a great example of what I think Conservatives should adopt as an MO toward the militant queers;

Two Men Say Cabbie Ejected Them For Kissing « CBS Chicago

Cab driver is offended at the behavior taking place in his cab so he stops the cab and tells them to stop or get out.

The queers of course call the cops and complain because they know only to seek a violent governments help to demand capitulation from private citizens and their businesses.

I think the cab driver should have gone through with forcing them out of his car on the Kennedy instead of taking them to a grocery store but bold action like this will break the PC induced “censorship via pear pressure” tactic if enough people will just stop cowering before these snakes.

Bravo Mr. Cab Driver!


#20

First of all, welcome to RO! I don’t get to the “Introduction” thread much these days! Back in the late 70’s, in a Chicago suburb of Skokie, IL, there resides the largest population of Holocaust survivors in the U.S. (At least it was back then…can’t speak for now.) The klan decided it was going to march through Skokie on one of the Jewish high holidays. (Can’t remember which one.) And, they decided that they were also going to hold a rally in front of one of the largest synagogues in Skokie during the services. Lots of people, including non-Jews, protested the city of Skokie allowing the klan a permit to do this because this was clearly a blatant act of harassment and purposeful disregard for sensitivities of a targeted Jewish population. (The klan has done this previously in a Chicago public park where many blacks lived and frequented the park with disastrous results.) Anyway, despite all of the protests to this disgusting display of hatred, the klan march was on. (There was a TV movie made about this incident back in the 70’s titled, “Skokie” and starred an elderly Danny Kaye in the main role.) The man who was played by Danny Kaye urged his congregation and residents of Skokie to remain calm and not to react to the klan’s hope of creating a volatile situation. Somehow, the residents of Skokie managed to keep their calm and not play into the hands of these disgusting morons of hate whose purpose was to hurt, insult, and create a situation of violence. The klan had their little hissy fit and left. Because the Skokie residents kept their anger in check, the klan never again sought to march through the suburb again and were quickly and summarily forgotten. But, the Skokie residents were not. They were hailed as heroes and examples of how to conduct ones’ self in the face of REAL hatred and bigotry.

I am not in favor of any private business having to conduct business with those whom they do not wish to conduct business. It seems like these kinds of situations backfire on those who would force businesses to succumb to political pressure such as the Chik-fil-A situation. It is also kin to BO’s trying to force Christian organizations (such as Catholic hospitals) to provide birth control coverage to employees when clearly it is a serious violation of the organization’s moral tenets. It is plain and simple tyranny–just like in Skokie, IL.