Calif Supreme Ct: Bake shop doesn't have to bake a cake depicting gay couple (suspect, free speech)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The State of California had asked the Calif Supreme Court for an injunction forcing a cake shop owner to bake a cake for a gay couple against her wishes.
Does this make that court the only one in the country so far, that thinks the people who wrote and ratified the 14th amendment , didn't intend it to grant extra rights to gays in 1865?
A California judge ruled Monday the state couldn’t force a cake shop owner to bake a cake for a gay couple’s wedding, ruling that doing so would constitute a violation of free speech.
Superior Court Judge David Lampe denied the State of California’s request for a preliminary injunction that sought to force bakeshop owner Cathy Miller to design a wedding cake for a gay couple. “For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment,” Lampe ruled, according to a press release sent to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
The injunction also posited that if Miller refused to design the cake, the state would force her to close her Tastries Bakery shop altogether.
“We are pleased that the judge recognized that the First Amendment protects Cathy’s freedom of speech,” chief counsel and Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund (FCDF) president, Charles LiMandri, said after the ruling, the press release reports. LiMandri argued in Friday’s court hearing that Miller doesn’t discriminate against same-sex couples, but refuses to use her artistic talents to express a message that conflicts with her religious beliefs about marriage.
(Click on the above URL to see full text of the article)
That's the hammer blow on the thumb of liberal causes. The screaming will be loud and long.
So you would easily support a baker's refusal to make a black and white couple a black and white layered wedding cake? Or maybe not even any kind of wedding cake at all?
So you would easily support a baker's refusal to make a black and white couple a black and white layered wedding cake? Or maybe not even any kind of wedding cake at all?
I wouldn't agree with them, but I would support their right to do it. There's a difference between the two.
It's interesting that some people can't seem to see the difference between refusing service to a particular type person and refusing to be apart of their agenda. You want a wedding cake and you're gay? Sure pick one and I'll sell it to you...you want me to DESIGN a gay wedding cake, nope...
Can I make a moslem butcher slaughter and sell pork?
Can I make a gay baker to create an anti-gay cake?
Can I make a Jewish printer print anti semetic brochures?
The point is that denying service to someone is not the same as denying to partake in their agenda.
Last edited by USMC1984; 02-10-2018 at 08:05 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
