Because freedom can't protect itself
Awesome! Great article and hope to see the justice system actually work.
Ever heard of the concept of taking your business elswhere? Instead of trying to ruin somebodys life because he doesn't share your beliefs? It's these types of scumsucking Liberals and the ACLUseless who are destroying our country. Read what what they've already done. Well, then again if this illiterate country was inclined to read this crap wouldn't be happening in the first place.
The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men by Christina Hoff Sommers
Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage and the Family by Stephen Baskerville (At least go to Amazon and read the Preface and Introduction to these two books.)
Purple Heart's Final Beat - A Soldier Suicide Story
Indoctrination U: The Left's War Against Academic Freedom by David Horowitz
Ivory Towers On Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America by Martin Kramer
The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America by David Horowitz
Plunder: How Public Employee Unions Are Raiding Treasuries, Controlling Our Lives and Bankrupting the Nation by Steven Greenhut
One Nation Under Arrest: How Crazy Laws, Rogue Prosecutors and Activist Judges Threaten You Liberty by Reosenzweig & Walsh
Mean Justice: A true account of a prosecutor's power and betrayel by Edward Humes
The Man by Irving Wallace (The “Black” President we should have had.)
The Innocent Man by John Grisham
Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case by Stuart Taylor Jr. and KC Johnson
Vince Flynn's “Term Limits” as a solution to our political problems.
Yeah Larry, Liberals and the ACLU are destroying 'Murika because we're saying "No, you can't discriminate against a certain group of people and disguise it as the Word of god". Go blow the "Help, we god fearing conservatives are being oppressed" whistle somewhere else.
Since the Colorado Constitution defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, can it be said that Colorado itself should be sued for discrimination? What about the rights of those of faith? Are they secondary to LGBT individuals? Why not simply take your business elsewhere?
Larry A. Singleton is correct. How dare you fascists suppose to overrule people's conscience.
Suppose instead of a baker or florist the "christian" is a paramedic and the injured person is gay? Or a "christian" firefighter finds the house on fire belongs to a lesbian couple?
Or, turn it around: How about if a "christian" calls a plumber and the plumber is an atheist and, seeing religious materials all over the house, then refuses to provide service?
A distinction should be made between private and public ( ie the government to which all citizens should have equal rights. ). This is why public accommodation laws are wrong. The firefighter and paramedic essentially work for the state and therefore must serve all citizens equally. The plumber is private and may choose to serve only atheists (or only theists) if he wishes. (I doubt he'd stay in business very long if he did either of those things, but it should be his choice. It is proverbial that "Hard cases make bad law," and this is born out by the public accommodations law. It we originally promulgated because of the racial caste system and perhaps it we necessary at the time to break it. That was a very different setting than the present one which has numerous bakeries that would be delighted to take the money of gay couples wishing to celebrate their union. What people like the litigants and the ACLU do is valorize opponents of gay marriage making them look like advocates of religious freedom. They should take their business elsewhere and publicize why. As a straight person I would avoid doing business with the discriminatory shop, while defending their right to choose their customers, and spending my money in gay affirmative businesses. That's what liberty is.
I own a cake-shop. I make "CAKES!!!" Period.
BUY THE CAKE & GET OUT!!
PUT WHATEVER LABEL YOU WANT ON IT, "yourself!!!" e.g. happy birthday to:, congratulations to:,
monkey marries cat:,
If the CAKE, DID NOT TASTE LIKE CAKE, YOU ARE MOST WELCOME TO ASK FOR A RE-FUND, EXCHANGE etc., etc., etc
Colorado judge Robert Spencer's ruling that government can force Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips to bake a gay wedding cake is a monstrous injustice -- even for those of us who are gay or lesbian and disagree with Mr. Phillips. It attacks you as well as him.
This ruling threatens your own fundamental liberties to freely exercise your political and religious beliefs, be free from forced labor, and be free from selective prosecution.
This ruling is a sure sign of an emerging totalitarian government, as evil as any fascist or communist regime. If the government can force Jack Phillips to work for anyone against his core political and religious beliefs, it can force you to do so too.
Under our fundamental social contract, the Constitution, everyone must be free to act on his or her own political and religious opinions, however unpopular (free speech and free exercise of religious beliefs are protected by the First Amendment). Yet Jack Phillips has been muzzled from acting upon his beliefs. All he did was decline to celebrate something he doesn’t believe in, while offering to bake anything else the customer wanted.
Also under the Constitution, every person is free to refuse to perform personal services for someone else (forced labor is called slavery, or involuntary servitude, and it is banned by the Thirteenth Amendment). Yet Jack Phillips is now being forced to use his artistic talents for others against his will, a grotesque case of involuntary servitude.
Finally, under the Constitution, every person must be free from selective prosecution for crimes not charged against other persons (for example, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments require the government to follow due process of law). Yet under a gross double standard, the government charges only Phillips, a conservative religious person, for violating an obligation to serve others, while ignoring left-wingers who do the same.
For example, in New Mexico, hairstylist Antonio Darden has been praised by media for dropping Governor Susana Martinez as a client because Martinez opposes same-sex marriage. Darden and Phillips do the same thing, yet only Phillips is prosecuted.
Let’s wake up to the dangers of government intrusions on our rights and resist them.
I have to agree with Larry here to say that what these two people did was un-necessary. They can just complain and take their business elsewhere but no, they think because everyone has to accept their lifestyle and views, they are entitled to a lawsuit. Here's the deal, if a gay cake shop were to tell me they won't take my business because I'm straight, I'll just go somewhere else and find someplace who will and probably do a better job. If you go into a butcher shop own by a religious muslim you don't expect to get pork and shouldn't throw a fuss at them because you yourself eat pork. Some christians just can't accept same sex marriage yet and there's no point in torturing him and his family with this useless lawsuit. HE'S NOT THE ONLY BAKER IN TOWN. GET OVER IT PEOPLE AND GROW UP
And for RJTO: paramedics and Drs go into their jobs knowing they have to serve everyone. This man makes cake and if they were ordering a birthday cake or regular cake it probably will be ok, but the matter of fact is this man grew up for so many years thinking marriage is between man and woman and it's hard to change that mindset.
Science has proven--REPEATEDLY--that homosexuality is biologically driven and is NOT a choice, despite what Old-Testament-thumpers would have people believe. I believe Dave and Charlie did the right thing--they exposed the bakery's policies for what they were: discriminatory. Extreme right-wing Christians aren't the only ones who have discriminated against homosexuality. Sad to say but ultra-conservative Muslims are guilty of the same flawed thinking, which isn't really thinking at all, but a belief in an idea that doesn't make logical or compassionate sense. So even if the baker had a been a conservative Muslim, his practices would still be discriminatory, according to the law.
Wow. The right wing extremists on here are upset that they aren't permitted to openly hate people....really? News flash folks: If you hate in the name of god it is still hate. Hate is not a family value, nor is it a christian value. You're not fooling anyone by using god, or christian principles, as a reason to be permitted to hate and discriminate against people. Your hatred is protected in your house of worship if you believe religion is about hate and discrimination, but a bakery is not a church. If your business is serving the public then you are expected to serve all the public. If you are unwilling to do this then don't open a business that is open to the public. The business owner has a right to open a business that serves members only - then he can cater to those who have hate in their hearts the same as he does. The government did not force this man to open a public business - that was his choice. So the "slave labor" ridiculousness is just a right wing extremist desparately reaching for a reason to be permitted to discriminate.
Citing books by other hateful extremists doesn't mean you are somehow right in your hate, it just indicates how widespread extremist hate in America is. This silliness about finding another baker and that these victims need to "grow up" is just that - silliness. The victims are not required to find another baker. Period. The baker is required to follow a law for a business that serves the public. Just because the baker has hate in his heart doesn't mean that he gets to act on it in public - and his business is in public.
P.S. To the person who asked whether Colorado should be sued because the constitution defines marriage as between one man and one woman - the answer is yes. Just because the majority of people in a state are discriminatory and vote for a discriminatory constitutional amendment doesn't mean that amendment is defensible. This will be shown when the Supreme Court of the United States strikes down all bans against gay marriage in this country - it is only a matter of time before that occurs.
"Ruin everybody's life?"
Gimme a break with the drama king sh*t. How does it "ruin" someone's life to make a cake for someone who comes to pick it up, PAYS for it and then disappears out of your life possibly forever?
And what happens when EVERY business decides to do it that way, b/c they think a united front is going to force things THEIR way? Then what do they do? Take their business to Fluffy and Fido?
I'm NOT gay, I don't care who IS gay and I'm sick of whiners, which is the only thing these "people" sound like to me.
FTR I'm actually uncomfortable watching gay movies so I don't buy them, but I also don't tell people "I'm going to stop doing business with you if you sell gay/lesbian videos in this store.
Will the ACLU offer to vigorously defend the 1st amendment rights of the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop against harassment by the rude lesbian of the gay lobby? It’s obvious that this biz was deliberately chosen for harassment for its insistence on defending its OWN rights.
It’s odd how the gay lobby insists on equal rights when their real goal is to eliminate from operating a business anyone who has 1st amendment rights they disapprove of. Where is the vindictiveness of the gay lobby coming from? Certain elements in Colorado in the gay lobby are behaving like Nazis treated Jews in the 1930s…
As of Jan. 2013, eight of the 12 comments here are "anonymous" and contain bullying, disrespectful name-calling, including Mr. Singleton’s. The open vindictiveness toward, and the additional BAITING of, a Lakewood cakeshop by the “dog wedding” ploy pursued by the lesbian, is beyond the pale.
YP.com lists 314 bakeries in or near Lakewood, CO, so this case ISN’T about buying a wedding cake, it's about destroying the first amendment rights of the owners of Masterpiece Cakeshop.
Colorado has a history of this type of agitation, dating back to 1993, when the targets were Celestial Seasonings Tea company of Boulder, Coors beer, Holly sugar, and Manfort meats. See http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/14/weekinreview/the-politics-of-dealing-with-the-threat-of-boycott.html
The book list offered by Mr. Singleton is not extremist, but the gay lobby policies exposed by these books are extremist. The research in these books present further evidence of the extremist approaches of said gay lobby, which will not rest until everybody is just like them: either gay, bisexual, or some other extreme such as “questioning” or “asexual”.
Not widely known: the American Psychological Association dropped homosexuality as an disorder from the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, only after its meetings were repeatedly disrupted by gay agitators.
Read Chavez' ruling. Just one thing missing. He clearly states five points that evidence must prove, the first of which, that the Charging Party are members of a protected class. I'm very interested to know what evidence legally proves that they are homosexual. Further, what evidence legally proves that the defendants actually knew that the Charging party are homosexual--and that the defendants based their decision to refuse service on that knowledge (as opposed to, say, some other irrational feeling).
Just read Chavez' ruling. One thing missing. He clearly states five points that must be proven by the evidence, the first that the Charging Party are actually members of a protected class.
I'd be very interested in seeing what evidence legally proves that the Charging Party are homosexual. Further, that the defendants somehow knew that the Charging Party are homosexual, and that the defendants refused service based on that knowledge (as opposed to, say, some other irrational belief).
Larry A. Singleton is anything BUT "right"
I received two badges of merit in Vietnam, aka Purple Hearts. You don't exactly try to earn a purple heart. You have to be shot, otherwise maimed in combat or DIE in combat to get the badge of merit, and I did everything in my power to AVOID becoming a physical casualty of the Vietnam War.
I have no idea what "feminism" has to do with purple hearts and the suicide of soldiers. I tend to believe that too many men are whiners when it comes to changing a long-practiced, and WRONG, view of women.
I have no idea what the hell type of mother they had who would give them to believe they should be so damn disrespectful to the opposite sex, but my own mother never did anything of the sort. Neither was she overbearing. She showed me by example how deserving women are of respect and I've lived by the example most of my life.
I could care less if women want to go to war on the front lines; I believe they have no idea what they're wishing for and will be sorry they asked to do it, but I have no objection to their doing it if that's what they want to do so badly that they actually fight tooth and nail to get it.
But some people need to stop whining about proper treatment of women and accept that a change has occurred. I for one will absolutely not tolerate a man who disrespects a woman in my presence. You do it in my presence, then you're making it my business. Not only mine either; everyone who sees it should make it their business enough to stop it from happening.
Get breaking news on issues you care about
Help fight for our rights. Donate to the ACLU.
Sign up for the ACLU Action newsletter.
Chip in to help protect all of our rights and liberties.
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York NY 10004
This is the website of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation.
Learn more about these two components of the ACLU.