Discrimination Based on Sexuality

[Psyko]

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

[Sniperwax]

I'll have to take your word for it. I think same-sex couples get too much attention as it is. Life is much easier to not care in any capacity for or against them.

[Legendary Apophis]

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

I thought the USA were the country of Freedom...isn't it contradicting a bit with Freedom to force someone to sell even if they refuse for religious beliefs?

I'm not saying I am a big defender of Freedom with a capital F, I'm just saying it goes against the notion of Freedom.

[Psyko]

I'll have to take your word for it. I think same-sex couples get too much attention as it is. Life is much easier to not care in any capacity for or against them.

I agree that it's not really that big of a deal whether or not a person is gay. I just wish the rest of the world would agree with that instead of trying to fit the not-straight into a box and strap them in with a bunch of restrictions and laws that they wouldn't have to deal with if they were straight, or if we just accepted them as human beings just like the rest of us and moved on.

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

I thought the USA were the country of Freedom...isn't it contradicting a bit with Freedom to force someone to sell even if they refuse for religious beliefs?

I'm not saying I am a big defender of Freedom with a capital F, I'm just saying it goes against the notion of Freedom.

The US is based on freedoms, yes, but there are limitations to that freedom. Just like how many businesses cannot refuse a person a job simply because they are black. While it is their business/company and they are "free" to run it as they choose, they are not "free" to discriminate against a fully qualified person based on something that does not affect their ability to perform the job.

Who someone has sex with has no bearing on whether or not they can pay for a cake. Places can refuse service to people without shoes or shirt, as it disrupts other customers and is unsanitary, but not if they are blonde, or black, or Russian, or just because they don't like them. Of course, the laws do change depending on where in the country you happen to be.

[Sniperwax]

I'll have to take your word for it. I think same-sex couples get too much attention as it is. Life is much easier to not care in any capacity for or against them.

I agree that it's not really that big of a deal whether or not a person is gay. I just wish the rest of the world would agree with that instead of trying to fit the not-straight into a box and strap them in with a bunch of restrictions and laws that they wouldn't have to deal with if they were straight, or if we just accepted them as human beings just like the rest of us and moved on.

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

I thought the USA were the country of Freedom...isn't it contradicting a bit with Freedom to force someone to sell even if they refuse for religious beliefs?

I'm not saying I am a big defender of Freedom with a capital F, I'm just saying it goes against the notion of Freedom.

The US is based on freedoms, yes, but there are limitations to that freedom. Just like how many businesses cannot refuse a person a job simply because they are black. While it is their business/company and they are "free" to run it as they choose, they are not "free" to discriminate against a fully qualified person based on something that does not affect their ability to perform the job.

Who someone has sex with has no bearing on whether or not they can pay for a cake. Places can refuse service to people without shoes or shirt, as it disrupts other customers and is unsanitary, but not if they are blonde, or black, or Russian, or just because they don't like them. Of course, the laws do change depending on where in the country you happen to be.

Yes this is all true but it only applies when the baker specifically judges the gay couple. It is within the rights of the baker to not participate in actions he is afraid will lead to judgement onto himself in the afterlife.

This is very difficult to prove one way or another so more simple minds like to draw immediate judgement on the baker or on the gay couple because it makes them feel smart to have an opinion.

A very easy solution would be to buy your cake elsewhere and not taint your marriage with bad juju from the very beginning. And thank goodness this lady wasn't foolish enough to visit a bakery owned by a.....wait this is a religious debate aren't these banned from this forum?

[Remedy™]

I'll have to take your word for it. I think same-sex couples get too much attention as it is. Life is much easier to not care in any capacity for or against them.

I agree that it's not really that big of a deal whether or not a person is gay. I just wish the rest of the world would agree with that instead of trying to fit the not-straight into a box and strap them in with a bunch of restrictions and laws that they wouldn't have to deal with if they were straight, or if we just accepted them as human beings just like the rest of us and moved on.

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

I thought the USA were the country of Freedom...isn't it contradicting a bit with Freedom to force someone to sell even if they refuse for religious beliefs?

I'm not saying I am a big defender of Freedom with a capital F, I'm just saying it goes against the notion of Freedom.

The US is based on freedoms, yes, but there are limitations to that freedom. Just like how many businesses cannot refuse a person a job simply because they are black. While it is their business/company and they are "free" to run it as they choose, they are not "free" to discriminate against a fully qualified person based on something that does not affect their ability to perform the job.

Who someone has sex with has no bearing on whether or not they can pay for a cake. Places can refuse service to people without shoes or shirt, as it disrupts other customers and is unsanitary, but not if they are blonde, or black, or Russian, or just because they don't like them. Of course, the laws do change depending on where in the country you happen to be.

Yes this is all true but it only applies when the baker specifically judges the gay couple. It is within the rights of the baker to not participate in actions he is afraid will lead to judgement onto himself in the afterlife.

This is very difficult to prove one way or another so more simple minds like to draw immediate judgement on the baker or on the gay couple because it makes them feel smart to have an opinion.

A very easy solution would be to buy your cake elsewhere and not taint your marriage with bad juju from the very beginning. And thank goodness this lady wasn't foolish enough to visit a bakery owned by a.....wait this is a religious debate aren't these banned from this forum?

I love reading your analogies
I think people just like to hate or complain about things and this is a big one with lots to say and the ability to stay around with much controversy for some time.

[Sniperwax]

I love reading your analogies
I think people just like to hate or complain about things and this is a big one with lots to say and the ability to stay around with much controversy for some time.

Well it is unfortunate that some people more or less abuse these types of laws. The laws were designed for more practical things like a doctor turning away a gay couple in need. That would obviously be very bad.

Were these laws really designed to get you the best possible wedding cake you can for your special day? This isn't even a world renowned gourmet wedding cake shop this is literally a guy that doesn't feel insecure wearing an apron selling cakes to cheap people unwilling to spend money on a proper cake.

Do we arrest and imprison the homeless man that refuses to accept coins from a gay couple? Where does it end?

[Remedy™]

I love reading your analogies
I think people just like to hate or complain about things and this is a big one with lots to say and the ability to stay around with much controversy for some time.

Well it is unfortunate that some people more or less abuse these types of laws. The laws were designed for more practical things like a doctor turning away a gay couple in need. That would obviously be very bad.

Were these laws really designed to get you the best possible wedding cake you can for your special day? This isn't even a world renowned gourmet wedding cake shop this is literally a guy that doesn't feel insecure wearing an apron selling cakes to cheap people unwilling to spend money on a proper cake.

Do we arrest and imprison the homeless man that refuses to accept coins from a gay couple? Where does it end?

LOL. I know, I can't believe we let people ask for rights. It's easier to just strip them. Minorities... they always lose... to our Majority vote

[Psyko]

I'll have to take your word for it. I think same-sex couples get too much attention as it is. Life is much easier to not care in any capacity for or against them.

I agree that it's not really that big of a deal whether or not a person is gay. I just wish the rest of the world would agree with that instead of trying to fit the not-straight into a box and strap them in with a bunch of restrictions and laws that they wouldn't have to deal with if they were straight, or if we just accepted them as human beings just like the rest of us and moved on.

Interesting story here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/0 ... 15563.html

I find it hilarious because of the Oregon Equality Act, which we passed in 2007. As stated in the article, it prohibits discrimination based upon Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity. Not only that, but the State Law says nothing about Religious beliefs (if I recall it properly - it's been a while). That said, Federal Law does trump State Law.

I've not heard if the same-sex couple involved is pressing any charges; I doubt it. But they were offered a free wedding cake from some reality TV baker.

Needless to say, in a place like Portland/Gresham, this business is getting a lot of negative backlash because of this incident.

I thought the USA were the country of Freedom...isn't it contradicting a bit with Freedom to force someone to sell even if they refuse for religious beliefs?

I'm not saying I am a big defender of Freedom with a capital F, I'm just saying it goes against the notion of Freedom.

The US is based on freedoms, yes, but there are limitations to that freedom. Just like how many businesses cannot refuse a person a job simply because they are black. While it is their business/company and they are "free" to run it as they choose, they are not "free" to discriminate against a fully qualified person based on something that does not affect their ability to perform the job.

Who someone has sex with has no bearing on whether or not they can pay for a cake. Places can refuse service to people without shoes or shirt, as it disrupts other customers and is unsanitary, but not if they are blonde, or black, or Russian, or just because they don't like them. Of course, the laws do change depending on where in the country you happen to be.

Yes this is all true but it only applies when the baker specifically judges the gay couple. It is within the rights of the baker to not participate in actions he is afraid will lead to judgement onto himself in the afterlife.

This is very difficult to prove one way or another so more simple minds like to draw immediate judgement on the baker or on the gay couple because it makes them feel smart to have an opinion.

A very easy solution would be to buy your cake elsewhere and not taint your marriage with bad juju from the very beginning. And thank goodness this lady wasn't foolish enough to visit a bakery owned by a.....wait this is a religious debate aren't these banned from this forum?

I can see the argument for either side. I'm fairly certain his religious freedoms will win out, however. Fed > State Laws.

It sounded like, in the news piece, there were previously turned away customers who were similar to the couple currently in the news. I believe the difference is the previous couples went elsewhere and this couple decided to file a complaint with the city; I'm sure they also decided to go elsewhere.