Bakery must pay $135,000 for denying service to same-sex couple

[Contrary1]

"For the times they are a-changin'" (Lyrics below)

"Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian on Thursday ordered the owners of a former Gresham bakery to pay $135,000 in damages to a lesbian couple for refusing to make them a wedding cake.

<snip>

Bakery owners Melissa and Aaron Klein cited their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage in denying service. The case ignited a long-running skirmish in the nation's culture wars, pitting civil rights advocates against religious freedom proponents who argued business owners should have the right to refuse services for gay and lesbian weddings.

Avakian's final order makes clear that serving potential customers equally trumps the Kleins' religious beliefs. Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot turn customers away because of race, sex, disability, age or religion, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said in a news release.

"This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage," Avakian wrote. "It is about a business's refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal."...

More: http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2015/07/sweet_cakes_final_order_gresha.html#incart_m-rpt-1


Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside ragin'
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly agin'
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin'
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'

© BOB DYLAN MUSIC CO

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[BrotherIvan]

2. Sad sad bigot tears

Delicious.

[passiveporcupine]

3. I'm so glad this is being resolved this way

It really stirred up a lot of anger. And brought the religious nuts out of the woodwork.

[DiverDave]

4. But the gofundme will be a gozillion dollars

* I don't know how much, but they will get a lot more then that from the bigots...sigh
Meanwhile us working stiffs live (HA!) paycheck to paycheck...

[Contrary1]

5. Chin up. Any money donated to the bakery...

means the less they have to donate to a Repub candidate.

[samsingh]

27. that's probably true

[Latrecia Bennett]

6. Well deserved

The religious nut jobs got what they deserved. The horror that they would have to bake a cake for two human beings.

[randome]

7. 'Skirmish?' They lose cases like this every time. It's no contest.

It's what ultra-right Conservatives do best these days -lose.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"The whole world is a circus if you know how to look at it."
Tony Randall, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao (1964)[/center][/font][hr]

[brett_jv]

8. SEEMS like great news and everything, but ... I'm hesitant ...

Suppose you're a Jewish Baker, and some Skinhead w/ a swastika tat on his forehead comes in and orders a cake made with design of, say, the Auschwitz Gates, with heads stuck on the fence poles ... Game of Thrones style.

Would we celebrate it if the Jewish Baker was fined $135K for refusing to create and vend the Nazi's requested cake?

These sorts of things can be a bit more complicated than they seem sometimes is all I'm sayin' ... We're happy 'we won' this particular battle, but does that mean it is ACTUALLY ... a universally 'good thing'? Cause I can almost guarantee that my hypothetical Nazi-type will soon be showing up at bakeries in Oregon and elsewhere.

And sadly ... he'll 'have a point', even I don't agree with it.

[PowerToThePeople]

9. political views are not a protected class

That is one major reason I avoid political discussions at work, when I work at places without union protections.

[freedom fighter jh]

10. +1

It's somewhat different, in that sexual orientation is a protected category, and I can't imagine that Skinheadism ever will be that.

But there is an important similarity. Making a wedding cake means contributing to the celebration of the marriage. It doesn't seem right to force anyone to do that. For some businesses, like restaurants, hotels, certainly hospitals, lots more, it makes sense to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. But in a case like a wedding cake, where the business's contribution amounts to support of the lifestyle, not just the person, the business owner should have the right to refuse.

[bettyellen]

14. "Support of the lifestyle"?!?! What the fuck! The marriage is not for them to judge.

[Starry Messenger]

16. Oh well. Your side lost.

Get over it. We don't have to support the bigot lifestyle.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

23. Please enlighten us as to what the gay "lifestyle" is.

What a load: The baker is no more participating in the wedding than s/he would be if it were a birthday, bris, graduation, baby shower, retirement, etc.

Pretty feeble effort on your part.

[yardwork]

25. Bullshit.

Selling a cake doesn't involve support of anybody's "lifestyle" anymore than a grocery store selling a six pack of beer does.

[smirkymonkey]

29. Thank YOU!

This is all getting to be a bit ridiculous.

[RKP5637]

28. Using this same line of reasoning, then racial discrimination is apparently perfectly OK. n/t

[hifiguy]

34. Um

Karma, and the law, can bite you hard in the ass when you choose to be a Colossal Dick (tm) Charles F. Pierce.

[jberryhill]

11. Lol, no

It's kind of surprising how many people can't tell the difference between an intrinsic property of personhood and an extrinsic one.

[Starry Messenger]

12. Haha.

Nope.

[Sheepshank]

19. Personally, I'd say they should especially if there is a religious component

..to the customers lifestyle/white supremacy. It knife cuts both ways. Frankly I don't see a white supremacist wanting to give their hard earned money to a Jew or patronizing their business for fear of being seen both their like minded friends. Wouldn't the Aryan be worried about secret ingredients, or quality issues?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

20. Skinheadism isn't a protected class.

The "Jewish Baker" would be within his or her rights to deny such a request.

[yardwork]

24. You're confusing two different things.

Business owners can't refuse to serve people because of who they are. Business owners can refuse to write offensive messages, though.

The lesbian couple just asked for a cake. They didn't ask for an obscene message to be written on it.

It would be wrong to deny service to a Nazi skinhead just because of who they are. Nobody would require a business to write a bigoted message on a cake.

[LynnTTT]

26. Not a protected class

Bakers don't have to comply with every request. They don't have to do nudity or use cursing. And I don't think being a Nazi is a protected group under the definition. But the law will continue to be protested.

[yardwork]

30. They don't have to do nudity for anybody, gay or straight.

I think that people may be assuming that the gay customers are demanding obscene images. That's insulting. We're just like everybody else. Really. We don't expect vendors to provide obscene or offensive services. We just don't want to be turned away on the premise that our very identity makes us offensive.

For instance, suppose a DJ says they will only play religious music. No rock and roll, no country, only gospel. Ok, imagine a gay couple who wants that for their wedding. The DJ can't turn them away just because they're gay. He can refuse to play music he wouldn't play for anybody else, though.

Same with the baker. They can say "no Nazi symbols" but they can't turn away a Nazi who wants s plain cake.

[lonestarnot]

13. 1983 claim?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

15. I think that only pertains to government violation.

[lonestarnot]

42. Yes must be a state actor.

[bucolic_frolic]

17. Blurred Boundaries

How is baking a cake for a commercial transaction 'participating' in a wedding ceremony?

You bake a cake, it's sold, the new owners of the cake use it for what they want.

It's not your cake anymore. You are not part of the cake, you are not baked into
the cake. You don't ever have to see the cake again. You go on to the next cake.

Just like I don't have to answer to the factory workers who boxed my Cherrios last week.

These religious fundamentalists are always trying to blur boundaries to suit their own
agenda, be it this case, or God gave us nature to strip mine, or your "no trespassing"
sign doesn't prevent Witnesses from ringing your doorbell at 9 AM Saturday.

Go get a life. Live normally. Stop proselytizing.

[Sheepshank]

21. Well said

And likewise they have no say who may partake of a cake once it leaves they shop. Maybe a straight marriage officiated by someone who is gay.

[Auggie]

18. $135,000? I was a juror on a personal TMJ injury accident case and we awarded about 2/3rds of that

in medical bills and suffering.

[Sheepshank]

22. Punitive damages in civil rights cases tend to be high. N/t

[Reter]

31. Sorry, can't support this

I believe in freedom, the owner should not be forced to make what he or she doesn't want to make. I have a libertarian swing when it comes to these types of things, so sue me.

[yardwork]

33. They aren't being forced to make something.

It's against the law to turn away a customer just because they are black. It's against the law to turn away a person just because they are Jewish, or Muslim, or Libertarian. And it's against the law in Oregon to turn away a customer solely because they are gay.

[restorefreedom]

36. i can.t believe i am saying this

but judge napolitano of f*x news gave an excellent explanation of this. basically, if you open a public storefront, you cannot pick and choose who comes into your store to buy your products, and you certainly can't pick and choose them based on any of the parameters of protected class. These people who are claiming religious exemptions are free to engage in any other kind of business or have any other type of job where they are not required to interact with the public. And if their religious convictions mean that much to them, then they need to retreat to their bubble and not have a public business. It's just like the Republicans are always saying when people complain about Walmarts low wages "well they don't have to work there." well now those words are coming back to bite them in the collective asses.

good enough.

[Glassunion]

38. You know the argument is really weak

when you can score a win with a Fox News quote.

Sad really.

[restorefreedom]

39. judge napolitano is actually a libertarian

one of the few (very few) sane voices there

[Glassunion]

37. So, by your reasoning I could be denied service at

a restaurant, bus station, courthouse, etc. Because I'm black. You could deny me service because of your freedom? Your idea of freedom smells bad to me.

Being gay is no different than being black. It's not a lifestyle, it's a way of life. It is the cards that one is dealt at birth, and we must play that hand until we die. Your idea of freedom stacks the deck against everyone else, with no care for anyone else's rights and freedoms.

According to your logic, refusing service is an exercise in freedom. Right?

[Cal Carpenter]

32. These bigoted assholes were so dumb

and clamoring for their 15 minutes of fame and I'm glad to see they have to pay for it.

Smart bigots will refuse service and not say why, as they always have. Say 'sorry, we're booked solid that week' or whatever. We can't pretend that doesn't happen too. And it can be hard to prove.

But these dumb fucks are like LOOOOOK AT MEEEEE! I'm a fucking idiot homophobic asshole! And breaking laws! And proud of it!

Jesus.

[Omaha Steve]

35. K&R!

[frazzled]

40. And yet Oregon permits pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions

they feel are "morally or ethically objectionable" (read: birth control and emergency contraceptives).

Just as other health care professionals and practitioners in Oregon have a choice, so do pharmacists have a choice whether or not to participate in activities they find morally or ethically objectionable. Oregon pharmacists cannot however, interfere with a patient's lawfully and appropriately prescribed drug therapy or request for drugs and devices approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for restricted distribution by pharmacies. Pharmacists enter into relationships with patients in the daily course of normal pharmacy practice. Within these relationships pharmacists have a duty to provide professional pharmaceutical care in the patient's interest.

The Board of Pharmacy expects each Oregon Pharmacist-in-Charge (PIC) to adopt written policies and procedures that address the issues of pharmacists' moral, ethical and professional responsibilities. It is the Board's belief that pharmacy policies and procedures could allow a pharmacist to exercise his or her choice to not participate, and at the same time not interfere with the patient's right to receive appropriate and lawfully prescribed drug therapy or drugs and devices approved by the U.S. FDA for restricted distribution by pharmacies. These may include dispensing of the prescription or drug or device by another pharmacist on site or arranging for the prescription to be dispensed by a pharmacist at another site. The Board also expects Oregon pharmacists to discuss issues of moral, ethical and professional responsibilities with their Pharmacist-In-Charge and to understand and comply with the pharmacy’s policies and procedures.

http://www.oregon.gov/pharmacy/pages/position_statements.aspx

So this is like a bakery saying we won't make your cake, but you can go to the bakery across town if you like. Why is the refusal to bake a cake (justly) punished as discriminatory, while the refusal to fill a woman's legal prescription or federally approved over-the-counter EC considered just dandy?

WHY?

[Initech]

41. To quote this movie Anchorman: "Bob Dylan once wrote the Times they are a changing."

These people have never heard that song.