Sure, you have freedom to worship. But it’ll cost ya’.
Yes. It’s come to this. We have judges ordering bakers to make cakes for a same-sex couple or else pay heavy fines as a punishment.
Land of the free, folks. If you wish to make a living, check that oogedy-boogedy religious stuff at the door pal.
GMA reports:
Administrative law judge Robert N. Spence found Friday that Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver, Colo. violated the law when he turned away David Mullins, 29, and Charlie Craig, 33, from his shop last year.
In his written decision, Spence ordered that Phillips “cease and desist from discriminating” against gay couples, or face financial penalties, and cited Colorado state law that prohibits businesses from refusing service based on race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.
“At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses,” Spence wrote. “This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”
The baker said that he truly believed creating a cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding would displease God. But the judge said it’s more important that the baker not offend others with his beliefs.
It’ll be interesting to see if the HHS mandate lawsuits will effect these kinds of situations.
December 10, 2013 at 1:04 pm
any judge with man parts ought to have recused himself.
December 10, 2013 at 1:22 pm
Pat:“Husband” is an office created through the vocation to the Sacrament of Matrimony, as “wife” is an office created by marriage. The Bible does not say “Women be subject to men” The Bible says:”Wives be subject to your husband” after, …AFTER, Saint Paul says: ”Husbands love your wives”. Matrimony is that Sacrament where two people love God through each other. That is why Sodomy is a despicable, disgusting aberration.
That is why Vaughn Walker, an admitted practicing sodomist, as judge sitting on the bench of Proposition 8 ought to have recused himself, he, having a vested interest. Some judges are just to ignorant to speak for “We, the people…”
December 10, 2013 at 7:11 pm
Mary, you can spin scripture your way, and I'll spin it mine.
December 10, 2013 at 10:36 pm
Great Pat! To Dave P, the situation is different. I know you amended your previous example to try to fit it. The situation you are describing pits two groups in which one dominated/discriminated/persecuted another in the past. I do not know how to handle that situation. However, it doesn't matter. As the judge pointed out, the owner discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation. As stated, he refused to even hear about plans for the cake. He denied the couple a cake before even asking about ornamentation/type of cake. I think it would have been reasonable for the couple to provide their own ornamentation (such as wedding cake figures) on their own. However, the owner didn't even allow that discussion to happen. If he had, I believe it would have turned out differently.