Christian Bakery Owners Silenced By Officials As Lesbian Couple Awarded $135,000 In Damages For Being “Mentally Raped” By The Bakers
[guest post by Dana]
Power corrupts obscenely and absolutely:
On Thursday, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian upheld a preliminary finding that sentenced Aaron and Melissa Klein, the Christian bakers who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, to a fine of $135,000 in emotional damages to the homosexual couple they denied service, but also added a new provision forbidding them to speak about their unwillingness to serve a gay marriage.
If you recall, the Kleins owned the now closed Sweet Cakes by Melissa Bakery. They had declined to provide a wedding cake for a lesbian couple back in 2013.
As a result, the lesbian couple claimed 88 symptoms of “emotional distress” in their subsequent lawsuit against the Kleins.
The Kleins had attempted to crowd source for help, but GoFundMe pulled their campaign, and not soon after (when they were questioned about it), implemented a new policy prohibiting campaigns from defending against claims of discriminatory acts.
Ignoring the fact that the Kleins did indeed provide cakes for gay customers when their business was open, Avakian made the following inaccurate assertion:
“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.”
With that, Avakian tyrannically issued a “cease and desist” order for the Kleins to shut-up already about same-sex marriages and violations of their faith:
“The Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries hereby orders [Aaron and Melissa Klein] to cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation,” Avakian wrote.
The Kleins responded to the gag order:
“This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” wrote the Kleins on their Facebook page. “According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech.”
Why is an elected official compelled to silence two individuals who already face bankruptcy and have been forced to close their brick and mortar business?
Perhaps because he is threatened by the Klein’s fighting spirit and refusal to go down without a fight:
The cease and desist came about after Aaron and Melissa Klein participated in an interview with Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. During the interview, Aaron said among other things, “This fight is not over. We will continue to stand strong.”
And we can’t have that.
Hans von Spakovsky of The Heritage Foundation responded to Avakian’s move to silence the Kleins:
It is exactly this kind of oppressive persecution by government officials that led the pilgrims to America. And Commissioner Avakian’s order that the Kleins stop speaking about this case is even more outrageous—and also a fundamental violation of their right to free speech under the First Amendment.
Avakian would have fit right in as a bureaucrat in the Soviet Union or Red China. Oregon should be ashamed that such an unprincipled, scurrilous individual is a government official in the state.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (86e864) — 7/3/2015 @ 2:36 pmHow is it possibly to make a rule of silence like that ?
seeRpea (0cf003) — 7/3/2015 @ 2:43 pmcheck that, how is it possible for someone to think that making a rule like that is lawful?
wow, people really do think that this is type of thing is okay to do, even (state) judges.
seeRpea (0cf003) — 7/3/2015 @ 2:54 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/03/first-amendment-challenge-to-search-warrant-gag-order/
I think in the long run he’s done them a favor by overreaching so blatantly. The cease-and-desist is based directly on an Oregon statute, but that statute seems clearly unconstitutional, clearly enough to overcome qualified immunity. The order should help them when they sue Avakian for depriving them of their civil liberties under color of law. It should clearly establish that his purpose is to suppress the expression of their opinions, which the first amendment says he can’t do.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/3/2015 @ 3:02 pmWell, the Oregon legislature seems to have thought it had the power to make such a law. And they can’t be sued. But Avakian can be, because he ought to have known that the law is invalid.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/3/2015 @ 3:03 pmconfirming what Washingtonians have known for years – Oregon is Dope.
seeRpea (0cf003) — 7/3/2015 @ 3:07 pmLet’s not forget that this big fascist worked hand in hand with SSM advocacy groups throughout this entire process. The advocacy groups were looped into the entire process by their fascist allies in government. The entire process was corrupt.
JD (816207) — 7/3/2015 @ 3:16 pmIt should hurt to be that stupid. And If he tried to silence me, believe it would. A lot.
Gazzer (ee3742) — 7/3/2015 @ 3:28 pmTar, feathers…some assembly required.
Dear Gay people,
Is this your idea of tolerance? I hope not. But you need to pay attention to it. Because there are one hell pf a lot more believing Christians in the U.S. Than there are Gays (surveyed at 70%+ of the poulation vs between 3% and 5%). And f you go up against a majority that bug, and do everything you can to anger them (as these idiots have) you are going to get curb-stomped. It won’t be just. It won’t be fair. But it. Will. Happen.
Wanna get stuffed back in the closet and have the door nailed shut for a generation? This is the way to do it.
And don’t expect the Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressives to defend you if it starts to be an election-loser. They don’t have principles, they have wants.
C. S. P. Schofield (a196fd) — 7/3/2015 @ 4:21 pmYeah, Milhouse, can you tell be again how I was being ridiculous when I said the 1st Amendment wouldn’t be much of a barrier to these people.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 4:53 pmelissa, please chime in, too.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 4:55 pmWords like tolerance are only tools for for these people. To pry you away from your rights, most especially the right to your own mind. And to speak your own mind.
When are you people going going to wake up? This is simply the leftist’s will to power. Gay marriage is a crowbar. A tool. A vote for gay marriage is a vote for Stalinism. Whether it’s your vote or Kennedy’s.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:07 pmSteve,
1. The law in question is restricted to people speaking in their capacity as spokesmen for a public accommodation. The idea is that putting up a sign saying “no blacks allowed” is itself discrimination, even if the business actually does serve blacks.
The Kleins remain free to say anything they like in their own names. They can even say that they shouldn’t have to participate in gay weddings. The only thing they can’t say, under this order, is that they won’t participate.
2. It is possible that the law might be upheld because for some reason I can’t understand the Supreme Court has created a category of “commercial speech” that is less protected than ordinary speech. Speaking as a business owner about what the business plans to do is obviously commercial speech.
3. Even so, I don’t think this law will stand up to a legal challenge, which I’m sure the Kleins are preparing. Maybe Avakian will get to keep his qualified immunity, but that’s about as far as the courts will allow this.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:14 pmNow, Steve, just because Bubba Watson has committed the sin against the Holy Ghost, diesn’t mean you need to go into full battle mode….
Not sure where to plunk this, but thus seems as good a place as any.
kishnevi (93670d) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:18 pmhttp://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/07/02/reddit-revolt-flares-again-as-ama-moderator-sacked-the-day-after-a-disastrous-jesse-jackson-qa/
Maybe the proper response from religious people who object to gay weddings is to post a sign in their establishments saying this:
By law we are required to participate in same-sex weddings, though we believe that this violates our right to live our lives according to the tenets of our faith. Therefore, we want potential customers to know that we donate 100% of the profits from events to which we are opposed but forced to accommodate to organizations who lobby and work tirelessly to protect religious freedoms from assault by secular society.
It doesn’t have to be 100% of profits, but they should made it understood that forcing them to participate in these sort of events will directly benefit organizations that the event hosts likely despise.
JVW (8278a3) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:22 pmNah, just say you’ll donate the money to the Phelps family. Don’t do it, of course, but there’s no harm in saying you will!
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:24 pmMilhouse @13, do you realize how bizarre this situation is?
On the one hand the gub’mint (in the case of Obamacare) argues that everyone eventually engages health care commerce. Thus, they can fine me if I don’t buy health insurance.
On the other hand, apparently, they are are not intruding on my private space if they merely restrict my speech when I speak on behalf of a public accommodation.
Yet according to Wickard everything I do is a public accommodation. I can’t even go off the grid and grow my own food and escape this sort of regulation.
I’m still waiting for you to ‘splain to me how nice and cozy I should feel about the 1st Amendment protecting my right to speak my mind. As the gub’mint increasingly asserts ownership of every aspect of life.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 5:59 pmLeaving the intricacies of the legal system aside, when do you people learn of the nature of who you are dealing with?
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:11 pmwhom
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:11 pmI’m casting an early vote… Brad Avakian, Scumbag of the Year!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:18 pmIt’s early yet, coronello.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:22 pmwhich is somewhat tautological.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:29 pmthoughtcrime is more important than real crime,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3147942/Woman-randomly-shot-death-popular-San-Francisco-pier.html
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:38 pmYou know, this kind of tyranny led some freedom-loving people to drastic measures back in 1775.
If governments continue to trample the unalienable rights and liberties of free citizens things could turn ugly really quickly.
The options appear to be a “Convention of the States” or something a lot less pleasant. As long as one man on SCOTUS gets to impose his weird and degenerate views on the entire nation, we have in fact, descended into a tyrannical oligarchy.
Even I can foresee the nearly inevitable consequences of governments trampling the unalienable rights of a free people.
WarEagle82 (d35bad) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:39 pmAnd f you go up against a majority that bug, and do everything you can to anger them (as these idiots have) you are going to get curb-stomped
I wish that assumption were correct. But look at the mindset reflected in the following survey, which Pew noted was evident among Americans following 9-11. Another pollster, Gallup, also revealed recently that more Americans than ever before are now calling themselves “liberal,” fewer are identifying themselves as conservative or siding with a right-leaning way of thinking.
It’s fascinating (but also repulsive) that most liberals were soft-hearted about Communism during the Cold War. But that phenomenon at least could be assumed to be born out of many left-leaning people excusing totalitarian Socialism due to their belief such extremism was dedicated to the welfare of the common man. But how can one square a similar sentiment when it’s currently being used to embrace reactionary, ultra-rightist, if you will, Sharia-Law Islamism?
^ This confirms to me that left-leaning biases can easily trigger a form of mental illness (or abject stupidity) in humans, and I don’t say that to be merely sarcastic. IOW, any sensible, logical person, upon a closer scrutiny of Islam and its history (rooted in the bloody, ruthless nature of Mohammed), should — at best — be non-plussed by it, but certainly NOT more positive towards it.
I don’t think this will end well.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/3/2015 @ 6:58 pmyou’re not curious about the methodology:
http://www.pewglobal.org/international-survey-methodology/?country_select=France&year_select=2015
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:07 pmWhen thinking about Oregon, remember that its citizens are incapable of pumping their own motor fuel. And they are embarking on a test program in which a State-provided GPS monitor will be installed in a vehicle and then it will automatically charge a penny to the vehicle owner’s credit card for each mile driven on an Oregon road. Will the device really be able to distinguish between roads and driveways/private roads? Really? And what about out of state travel for those few Oregonians who know to pump their own fuel? They’re looking for 5000 fools to volunteer their vehicles to see how the device works. One small point, the private company that talked Oregon into this project will retain 40% of all revenues. Capitalism at work! A toad like Avakian is lucky to have found such an intellectual backwater in which to exercise his authority. Imagine his surprise when the Kleins didn’t submit to his bullying. My hope is that his surprise metastasizes into something suitable for a petty tyrant, which I’ll leave to the reader’s imagination.
bobathome (5b5810) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:32 pmand the fellow who put death panels, in the stimulus, is their rep,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:36 pmAs often pointed out by others, the problem is not just what a given judge does, but what the populace is willing to put up with/ignore.
yeah, polls. I wonder how much that what’s-it-called effect kicked in, no one wanted to say they disliked Muslims.
yeah, after Wickard, it’s hard to see what the govt. can’t do.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:44 pmDo any legal people spend time trying to think up strategies to undo Wickard?
MD I don’t believe in polls generally. I don’t think people really want to tell strangers anything. All the exit polls at the recent Brit election were horrendously wrong. Folks on the right are tired of being harangued by lefty numpties, even in the UK. They tell pollsters what they think they want to hear and then in the privacy of the booth they do the right thing.
Gazzer (ee3742) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:54 pmLikewise TFG polls against all reason but who is going to disapprove of him and be called a Rayciss?
narciso- I wish there was a way that family could sue everyone from the custodian in the jail that let him go to president Obama, and everyone in between.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:58 pmyeah, after Wickard, it’s hard to see what the govt. can’t do.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 7/3/2015 @ 7:59 pmDo any legal people spend time trying to think up strategies to undo Wickard?
Pipe dream, I am afraid.
The first Obamacare case would have been a good place to at least say Wickard can go no farther.
Actually, SCOTUS did sort of do that, but softly, so softly that they ended up just renaming it the power to tax. So expecting the courts to abandon Wickard is unrealistic. Unless you think President Cruz will be able to appoint four Scalias to the Court (or even five, if the real Scalia decides he could safely quit).
I do not accept polls either. But for me it is sample size. One thousand people accurately represent the entire population of France, which a very quick Google tells me was 66 million in 2013? I hear they have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.
kishnevi (93670d) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:04 pmWe are WAY past tolerance now. We are somewhere between mandatory participation and mandatory celebration.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:04 pmI bet the same poll would find the same kind of acceptance of Jews and Christians.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:06 pmI tend to doubt it:
http://www.steynonline.com/7032/going-with-the-flow
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:11 pmI tend to doubt it:
Out of laziness or a desire to scroll quickly through a thread, I often don’t click on links—which is why I’ll post snippets of text from a webpage that I find worthwhile. But I’m glad I visited your link since it leads to a column in which the following best exemplifies how bad things are, how even worse things may become.
^ People of the left (and all the ideological squishes out there too) are too idiotic, irresponsible and, yes (and ironically) heartless to realize just how harmful their supposed do-gooderism really is. Even more so with all the controversies — going back decades — surrounding the Catholic church, priests and young male parishioners.
Again, if liberals at least didn’t fall for the idea that their sentiments are guided by a big heart, a lot of compassion, a lot of generosity, I wouldn’t find them quite so galling or detestable.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:36 pmSticky buns… Yum…
mg (31009b) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:40 pmon the cake order, was it just for a cake or was an inscription involved too?
if the later, then the bakers should go to Federal Court and sue everyone involved.
Freedom of Speech is not limited to vocalization, you can’t legally force someone to write something down , no matter the medium, if it violates that person’s conscience.
I’d also like to know if the bakery would be sued if they don’t deliver a good cake.
seeRpea (0cf003) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:41 pmNot a bad cake, but just an “eh” cake.
All the exit polls at the recent Brit election were horrendously wrong.
That’s reassuring since I certainly do find various socio-political trends detected by quite a few polls to be absolutely pathetic. But I’m also more cynical about human nature now than ever before, due in part to a realization — as detailed in Mark Steyn’s column linked by narcisco — about how most people truly are “sheeple,” too easygoing, too weak, too conformist, to stand up to increasingly assertive trends, even very bad ones.
Humans in general are lemmings, and liberalism (and all its false promises and hidden but very tricky phoniness) in particular seems to be most influential in pinging people’s lemming-type of emotions.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/3/2015 @ 8:43 pmEven lemmings weren’t actually lemmings. Disney made that up, as I recall.
Gazzer (ee3742) — 7/3/2015 @ 9:04 pmBurn the freedom witch! Burn her!
That seems to be the battle cry this Independence Day.
I intend not to despair. I just ordered three books from Amazon. Japanese Destroyer Captain by Hara Tameichi (along with my dad and Orita Zenji’s I Boat Captain, and my drill instructors of course, probably the biggest influence on my life), The Battle of Tassafaronga by Russell Sydnor Crenshaw, and Neptune’s Inferno by James Hornfischer.
The first two aren’t new to me. I read Hara’s Destroyer Captain until it fell apart. Hence the need for a new one. Crenshaw’s book I gave away at the DFW airport. Some guy in a kilt saw me reading it we got into a conversation, and finally I was like, “just read the book” and handed it to him.
But if you’re familiar with Crenshaw, and a sailor, you want all his books in your library. He been there, done that.
The new one will be Neptune’s Inferno. I have Hornfischer’s Ship of Ghosts, about the early loss of the USS Houston. Also his Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors, about Leyte.
All compelling reads. I look forward to Neptune’s Inferno.
There are more dead Sailors off Guadalcanal lying in Iron Bottom Sound then there are dead Marines on it. I intend not to disgrace any of them. But first I will read about them.
Have a happy 4th.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 9:39 pmthe last really gave me a perspective, on the Southern pacific theatre,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 9:42 pmYou’ve read it, narcisso?
It’s not like I don’t have a perspective. Crenshaw’s South Pacific Destroyer is an invaluable resource. Especially with his drawings of engagements. I just piece it together. For example, ok, at Vela Gulf Hara was in Shigure here. Crenshaw was in Maury here. Meanwhile Orita was over there.
Maybe my book, Black Cats and Green Dragons, should focus on stitching everything together.
Nah. That’ll never sell.
I’ll have to make it about a young soldier and a non-gender conforming Noumean. Then schools will be required to buy it, and I’ll make a fortune.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/3/2015 @ 10:39 pmHundreds of Oregonians permanently lose their favorite bakery while one lesbian couple makes out like a bandit.
elissa (4d3f88) — 7/3/2015 @ 11:20 pmthe only proper response is to hate them, treat them as enemies of America, to whom we owe no respect. Because they are truly enemies of America, and we must fight them, oppose them in every way.
They do not tolerate us; we should return the favor.
Michael Ejercito (d9a893) — 7/4/2015 @ 12:01 amIt’s time.
Kevin Stafford (df475d) — 7/4/2015 @ 5:12 amwell Inferno, is more from the staff level, the Captain of the Atlanta’s journal, was the primary source,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/4/2015 @ 6:00 amwhereas the others are more from the grunt to junior officer
I got lil nephew guy a kitchen aid yesterday for so he can make cakes he’s very talented … they’re going to a gay marriage soon for a teacher his mama work with
today we celebrate all the independence
happyfeet (20c3de) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:23 amYes sir, Mr. feets. Including the independence not to be bankrupt, fined and punished by our government because of our faith.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:28 amyes yes something is awry in oregon
happyfeet (20c3de) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:29 amIt’s coincidental but I’ve been emailing an old friend from Roslyn, PA who moved to Oregon about 12 years ago. Her husband just passed away and she moved to the Clearwater, FL area. Just to get away from the leftists in Oregon! She’s very well off and could go anywhere but she knew she had to vacate Oregon. Says she’s tired of getting “californicated”.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:36 amIs Oregon the state with the switch-hitter governor?
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:37 amYou’ll have to be more specific, nk. The way things are going a lot of states seem to have switch-hitters.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:42 amMy favorites are Shattered Sword and Black Shoe Carrier Admiral, the latter being one of your recommendations Steve. Fletcher did a remarkable job maintaining his fleet in a threatening position east of the Solomons, and he showed great judgment when he chose to engage. It’s a tribute to independent commands. In this case radio silence prevented the BEMFs from telling him how many airplanes to dispatch, the size and type of bombs to be used, etc., all of which characterize progressive warfare in the “modern” era. Especially when the best and brightest infect the civilian leadership of our military, and the purpose of warfare devolves into “sending messages” to the leadership of our enemies. At the cost of our lives and fortune.
I’ve ordered Japanese Destroyer Captain. I look forward to reading it. But Japanese sailors were no different from their soldiers when it came to slaughtering civilians. Given that German SS troops were equally obedient, this is not a “racial” judgment, but it does affect my opinion of the men.
bobathome (5b5810) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:44 amYes, yes it is. But according to Wikipedia, she’s the first and only state governor. Openly, that is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Brown
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:46 amThe way things are going a lot of states seem to have switch-hitters.
The most prominent one of them all is currently occupying the White House—which, btw, was bathed in rainbow-colored lights the evening of the Supreme Court’s recent dumb ruling.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:47 amwell Shinto nationalism, might have played a part there,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:49 amSure am glad all this hue and cry about Amerikkka being queered has sucked all the oxygen out of the blue skies.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/07/breaking-obama-admin-knew-al-qaeda-was-planning-attack-in-benghazi-10-days-in-advance/
DNF (3f6028) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:53 amthat’s two months old, but that was my informed conjecture, at the time,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:55 amon the cake order, was it just for a cake or was an inscription involved too?
My understanding is that it was a “custom cake” but the details I haven’t seen.
Inferno and Shattered Sword are favorites. I’ll have to find “Black Shoe Admiral.”
Mike K (90dfdc) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:00 amThe Wehrmacht were just as bad. They committed the most notorious atrocities in Greece. And there’s at least one documented instance of an SS general opposing a Wehrmacht general’s planned slaughter of civilians on the Russian front.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:02 amDNF, Amerikkka has been queered for years. Ever since they convinced parents that kids sports shouldn’t keep score cause some snowflakes self esteem may take a hit. We’ve gone from George Patton to pajama boy in a generation. And just look at us now. How proud I am. NOT!
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:03 amI started some notes around here:
http://narcisoscorner.blogspot.com/2012/09/from-shore-of-benghazi-to-halls-of.html?view=sidebar
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:05 amIt’s a sad thing when the toughest American men left are the lesbians.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:10 amMark’s obsession with Barack’s gay lover is creepy.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:46 amIn the near future, speaking favorably of the patriarchal heteronomrmative macroeggression Edson and his Marine/s tantrum in 1942 on an island the imperialist capitalist running dogs colonized called Guadalcanal committed against the earnest, well intentioned non-white equitable peoples of Asia will be a crime.
The Japanese will be f*****g amazed.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:49 am@67 didn’t come out as I intended. No worries. I’m sure the SCOTUS will fix it.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/4/2015 @ 8:56 amMark’s obsession with Barack’s gay lover is creepy.
JD, I’ve noticed you in the past being a bit resentful when the sexual history of the US’s current history is pointed out or alluded to. I’m not sure if that’s due to your being the type who proclaims “we should always respect the office of the American presidency!” If so, why? After all, this society has allowed itself to be thoroughly dumbed down and cheapened, so regrettably there’s no turning back.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:06 amThe Japanese will be f*****g amazed.
Keep in mind that when Obama (and, btw, my previous post should say “the US’s current president…”) visited Japan a few years ago, it was he who wanted to publicly apologize for the dropping of atomic bombs on that nation. But Japanese officials themselves (particularly the ones in charge of official etiquette) were so disturbed by the idea, they nixed it and had him change his agenda.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:10 amGo f@ck yourself, Mark. I am not the least bit resentful of his sex life. You are the one with a fixation on the National Enquirer rumors. That is on you.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:17 amDamn, JD. That’s a peculiarly hostile reaction, as though you’re taking personally the nature of the joke now occupying the White House. Why? For one thing, you didn’t specify whether you’re the type who adheres to the idea “we should always respect the office of the American presidency.” More crucially, when you shrug off all the heard-on-the-grapevine talk about the current president’s past (not to mention the many occasions more recently when the guy has carried out an oddly separate lifestyle from his wife) as in the category of “National Enquirer,” you’re implying you don’t buy into the talk. If so, why?
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:41 amHe is secretly my gay lover and I am tired of you rubbing his past dalliances in my face. Good Allah, you are dense.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:43 amJD, you’re still not clarifying why you’re responding the way you are. You’re acting like a closeted liberal.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:46 amI spent some time trying to learn how to donate money to the bakery folks but have not been successful. Anybody know a reliable place ?
Mike K (90dfdc) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:56 amLet’s see how effin clear I can make this, Mark … Speaking only for myself, but I suspect I am far from the only one, I would rather give myself a root canal with a rusty drill and no anesthesia than to discuss for the 62848462745th time you imaginings of Obama’s sex life.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:56 amI am a closet liberal. Yes.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:57 amif I may JD, good allah,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:07 amnot sure how you give monies but i found the cutest summer tops on sale at herberger’s
now im in mergency rm w lil bro cause he brutalized one of his lil piggies sumpin special
which means no tubing today praise jesus
happyfeet (1dd8fc) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:07 amI am a closet liberal. Yes.
JD, are you as bothered by the “62848462745th” times the other scroungy or stupidly political aspects of Obama have been mentioned?
Yea, I know there’s the belief that a person’s personal life should remain private, but the guy now in the White House did happily (and arrogantly, and egotistically) force himself into the middle of the public spotlight. More crucially, and even more so because of his past and current contradictory stances on SSM, his own lifestyle is more relevant than before.
He recently had the White House lit up in rainbow colors, and he and his ilk believe the GLBT should be out and proud, so I don’t think he has a right to be bothered in the least if his own GLBT proclivities are talked about.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:20 amOh dear Allah, forgive me.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:24 amRef # 57
“… the White House—which, btw, was bathed in rainbow-colored lights the evening of the Supreme Court’s recent dumb ruling.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 7:47 am ”
= = = = = =
It’s been mentioned elsewhere that it takes a good while to set up such a light show.
Is it normal for SCOTUS to tell POTUS what their decisions are, in advance of announcing them to the public?
Was this just a “special instance”, no harm no foul?
Or did the Puppeteer know from long-prior-agreement what His Black-Robed Puppets would decide?
A_Nonny_Mouse (1a3c65) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:45 am^ In this time of the USA becoming a banana republic, I wouldn’t put it past any entity in DC, etc, including the Supreme Court, to do something unethical or inappropriate.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:55 amWe are now in the punishment stage of our French Revolution. Literal heads may not roll across the public square, but reputations and fortunes will be just as effectively destroyed.
Patricia (5fc097) — 7/4/2015 @ 10:58 amHe is secretly my gay lover and I am tired of you rubbing his past dalliances in my face. Good Allah, you are dense.
JD (3b5483) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:43 am
coffee spew at “rubbing his”…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2015 @ 11:01 am#82: A_Nonny, the apparent advance warning given by SCOTUS to the administration is just a confirmation of the extraordinary people we appoint to the Supreme Court. Unlike those who aren’t selected and confirmed, these lawyers once bought (or extorted) stay bought. This is what substitutes for character in progressive circles.
bobathome (5b5810) — 7/4/2015 @ 11:15 amJD.- Thank you for being you, and thank you for your efforts. (IYKWIMAITYD)
elissa (ef926b) — 7/4/2015 @ 11:30 ambobathome-
Ah, yes, the very definition of ‘upright character’.
Kind of a shame these guys don’t read the right kind of history. As I understand it, when the Glorious Revolution comes, bought or not, the Useful Tools stop being useful and start mysteriously disappearing.
A_Nonny_Mouse (419cbb) — 7/4/2015 @ 11:31 amUmmm, I’ve tried twice to respond to Mike K at #75.
Are embedded links verboten? Do I need to tinyurl them?
For a roundabout way of getting “there” from “here” —>
Mike, go look at MaxedOutMama (dot) blogspot (dot) com. She has a link to a Sweetcakes by Melissa donation page in today’s post. I’ve been reading her for years and I do trust her content.
((Now we’ll see if THIS one shows up …))
A_Nonny_Mouse (d252c9) — 7/4/2015 @ 11:45 amThe problem’s at your end, ANM.
http://maxedoutmama.blogspot.com/2015/07/celebrating-fourth-by-baking-cakes.html#links
https://www.continuetogive.com/4811392/show_badge_selector
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 12:09 pmI didn’t mean to imply anything with “your end”.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 12:10 pmGlad you qualified that, nk. Sweet Cakes and all….
Dana (86e864) — 7/4/2015 @ 12:12 pmWeird about the comments that didn’t post; but oh, well, we got the info “out there”.
Regarding “sweetcakes” and “my end” . . . tsk, tsk!!! {=snerk!=}
A_Nonny_Mouse (3f0df2) — 7/4/2015 @ 2:50 pmObviously, the titular father of our what passes for a country taking his second Father’s day running to drub golfs a mainland away from his putative nuclear unit identifies the polished turd as a rank pervert is beyond dispute.
Shall we respect the office just the same? Tards?
DNF (3f6028) — 7/4/2015 @ 6:41 pmUm, no, they can’t. The Supreme Court said very decisively that they can’t make you buy anything, and they can’t fine you for not buying anything, and if the ACA actually had a mandate it would have been struck down, but there isn’t one. Congress never passed a mandate, they just said they did.
It makes some sense; if you can’t actually refuse to serve blacks, then you also can’t say you’re going to in order to make them stop asking.
What are you talking about? Wickard has nothing to do with public accommodations. If you’re not providing a public accommodation then the whole issue is irrelevant to you, because nobody is asking you to deal with them in the first place.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:26 pmYou should feel perfectly nice and cozy about that. The Kleins are free to speak their mind, and nobody is trying to stop them. Nobody. Not Avakian, and not anyone else. That is the simple fact. All Avakian told them they can’t say is that they will continue to break the law (as he purports it to be) by discriminating against gay people (as he characterises it). That is not speaking their mind.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:29 pmUm, of course it will. That’s the whole point of GPS, isn’t it?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:31 pmThere are obviously plenty of things the government still can’t do, or else no law since the 1940s would ever have been struck down!
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:32 pmGarbage. Sibelius had nothing to do with Wickard, and they didn’t rename anything. The power to tax has been there since 1788.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:33 pmInterstate commerce was the government’s argument in Sebelius. Taxing power was Roberts’s lifeline. And federal jurisdiction over private discrimination, whether in public accomodations or in employment, derives from from “affecting interstate commerce”, i.e. Wickard.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:36 pmNot only is it two months old, but it’s a load of bulldust. All you have to do is read the lede paragrah and you can see that Jim Hoft’s headline is a blatant lie. The email Judicial Watch obtained shows that on September 12, the day after the attack, the DOD reported that it was committed by BCOAR, and had been planned at least 10 days in advance.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:41 pmSays who?
No, it’s not normal, and no, there’s no reason to suppose it happened this time. It’s groundless speculation by some idiot.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:44 pmNo, the government argued both. Roberts wasn’t buying the commerce argument, because not buying something is by definition not commerce. The only flaw with the tax argument was that 0bama and Pelosi and Reid had sworn up and down that it wasn’t a tax, and now the solicitor general was admitting that they lied. Roberts didn’t see how that was a problem; he already knew they were liars.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:49 pmNot i.e. Wickard. Actual public accommodations, who are actually doing business with the public, are engaged in interstate commerce every time they have a customer from another state. Filburn’s argument was that the wheat he grew wasn’t entering the stream of interstate commerce, because it never left his property.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/4/2015 @ 9:51 pmThey are being told that they can’t advertise that their business is planning on breaking the law and discriminating against a minority group. It’s no different than telling a business that they can’t put a sign in their window that says “White’s Only” or “No Blacks Allowed”. They can still express their opinion and talk about what’s going on, they’re just being told that they can’t advertise that their business is planning on doing something illegal.
This is being framed in an extremely dishonest way.
Sasha Fox (f31319) — 7/5/2015 @ 3:55 pmUm, no, it is framed exactly as it is. If there’s dishonest framing, it’s in the way the Kleins and their spokesmen are pretending they have been silenced.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:03 pmit is in the nature of exercising one’s faith, that one will be persecuted, or proscribed, John 15: 18-20
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:07 pmDishonest framing?????
elissa (344657) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:16 pmSasha, I think that most sane people cannot imagine in what universe $135,000 in damages is reasonable over a damn cake. The excessive damages are not the only issue, but they are largely what has set rational people off about this case. The damages are what has made it nearly impossible for the Kleins to move from hostile Oregon and open a new bakery elsewhere. Most decent people don’t think they should have been forced to lose both their current livelihood, plus the ability to ever open a new business over this. Do you?
it’s an abject lesson, don’t even think of doing this again,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:23 pmElissa, I don’t think most rational people think not wanting to participate in a gay wedding is discrimination against gay people, or should be illegal. But given the absurd premise that it is so, and that it’s the same as refusing to serve gay people at all, which in turn is the same as not wanting to serve black people, the fine might not seem all that excessive.
But this thread isn’t really about the fine, but about the so-called “silencing” order, and really that has been framed dishonestly by the Kleins and their advocates. The law is about businesses that put up signs saying they won’t serve black people, even if they don’t actually mean it; merely saying it is discrimination, because it’s designed to discourage black people from even asking to be served.
I don’t think the law is constitutional, because I don’t understand where the Supreme Court got the idea that commercial speech is less protected than other kinds of speech. But the Court does have such a doctrine, and there’s no question that the speech Avakian is suppressing is commercial, he probably wins this case, provided that we swallow the initial absurd premise that there is any sort of discrimination going on in the first place.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:32 pmot’s part of the alchemy and hisruptcy common to the profession:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/the_penumbra_school_of_law.html
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:38 pmNarciso, your linked article repeats the lie that “It also banned the bakers from making any statements challenging same sex marriage.” This tells me the author didn’t pay too much attention to his material.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:41 pmthere’s no question that the speech Avakian is suppressing is commercial
A bigger question is how do idiots and extremists like Avakian somehow manage to worm their way into the public sector and cause so much havoc? Such people remind me of bored, fidgety, nosy, OCD-plagued people with a Napoleon complex pushing themselves into a position of authority within a homeowners association and causing grief for various residents in a condo complex.
Mark (e584c3) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:41 pmthe italicized sppeech:
“The Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries hereby orders [Aaron and Melissa Klein] to cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation,” Avakian wrote.
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/5/2015 @ 4:58 pmYes, exactly. How does that prevent them, or even slightly hinder them, from “making any statements challenging same sex marriage”, or any other statements, to their hearts’ content?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 5:07 pmSay = speech
Saying that they are going to break the law is speech. Would it have been right for a judge to make an order to Martin Luther King that he couldn’t say he was going to break an unjust law?
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 7/5/2015 @ 6:46 pm@110, oh, sorry Milhouse. I guess I was under the impression that since the $135,000 in damages was included in the thread’s title and within the introduction that we were allowed to mention it in comments. My mistake.
elissa (344657) — 7/5/2015 @ 7:05 pmElissa, you can comment on anything you like, but the thread of comments you’re replying to hasn’t been about the fine. You’re addressing comments that were specifically about the Kleins’ claim to have been silenced. Specifically you’re addressing my reply to Sasha Fox’s claim that I had dishonestly framed the issue of that alleged silencing. So the fine just isn’t relevant.
Taney, saying you’re going to break someone’s head is speech too, but if you say it in a way that puts him in fear that you’re about to do it then it’s also assault, a crime for which you can go to prison, and the first amendment will not protect you.
If Congress can make it illegal to refuse to serve blacks, then it can also make it illegal to tell blacks not to bother asking for service, because it amounts to the same thing. And that is what Oregon law bans. And that (given the absurd premise that not baking a cake for a gay wedding is the same as not selling cakes to gay people) is what Avakian ordered them not to say. Since the speech banned is definitely commercial, the Supreme Court in its ineffable wisdom says it gets less protection than normal speech. And even without that, such a narrowly focused ban might well pass strict scrutiny.
I don’t think any kind of discrimination should be illegal. I think the freedom of contract should be protected by the 14th amendment’s immunities and privileges clause. I think it should be legal to refuse to do business with blacks, gays, Jews, Bostoners, or whomever else a person dislikes. And it should of course be legal to say you’re going to do so, whether or not you plan to actually do so. I also think you should be able to say anything in an advertisement that you can say outside it, subject only to the laws of fraud (which is also a kind of speech). But current jurisprudence disagrees with me.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 7:47 pmI think you’re engaging in hyperbole. Threatening to break someone’s head is not the same as saying you will not bake a cake for a same sex marriage. Refusing to participate in SSM is not the same as refusing to serve blacks since they happily baked cakes for homosexuals, just not for SSM. Baking a cake for a homosexual is about personal dignity, not baking a cake for SSM is about our actual written constitutional right to exercise our religion in ALL parts (public and private) of our lives not just at church or a synagogue or in the privacy of our homes.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 7/5/2015 @ 10:10 pmI agree 100%, but Avakian’s premise is that they are the same, and we can only discuss his actions in the context of his premise.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 10:17 pmPS: I am actually in the business of providing services for weddings. In the unlikely event that I am asked to provide my services for a same-sex “wedding” I plan to refuse. I have no objection at all to providing the same services for a same-sex commitment ceremony that does not purport to be a wedding.
I will also refuse to provide my services to any wedding in which one partner is Jewish and the other is not. And I don’t give a **** whether it’s legal. Fortunately, I’m unlikely ever to be asked.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/5/2015 @ 10:20 pmComing soon to the US:
This is the whole point of inventing same sex marriage. Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom didn’t protect this school, and the 1st Amendment will be violated just as easily.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/6/2015 @ 8:31 amHas anyone read the list of problems this “couple” have because they were refused a wedding cake?
“Felt mentally raped, dirty and shameful”
“Dislike of going to work”
“Doubt”
“Pale and sick at home after work”
“Sadness”
“Felt stupid”
“Loss of sleep”
“Excessive sleep”
Really, excessive sleep and loss of sleep at the same time?
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 7/6/2015 @ 8:51 am2001 Obama WBEZ Interview:
Get ready for the shift.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/210061/#respond
What must the Feds and the states do on your behalf? If you’re reading this comment, no doubt nothing on your behalf. But it must do things to you on behalf of certain peoples dignity interests.
You don’t have any dignity interests. If you or your children don’t want to share a locker room or a bathroom with someone who is of the opposite sex who “identifies” as your or your kids’ sex, tough. They get to “define and express their identity.” No dignity or privacy rights for you.
I’m amused that some people think the courts will be staunch defenders of the 1st Amendment. As Prof. Turley notes, Kennedy has been working toward this for years. And he’s laid down plenty of markers as to where this will lead. It will lead to Oregon.
Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas know exactly where this is going to head, and they warned about it in their dissents. In the Windsor case Kennedy concluded that my opposition to SSM can only be explained as irrational animus toward gays.
Just as the court can not specify what exactly is contained by a right to dignity, the court can not and has not specified what is unconstitutional animus, and what is evidence of unconstitutional animus.
Like didnity, the more amorphous the notion of of unconstitutional animus the better and more useful it is to judges like Kenndy. They can simply deem anything they wish to be animus.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:05 amLook at the bright side. Christians got to lecture lesbians about how their lifestyle is evil and against God, even quoting Leviticus. I’m all for this type of honesty and openness.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:06 amno, carlitos that is exactly the type of doubleplusungood speech, to be discouraged,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:08 amwindsor was a floor wax, obergefell was a dessert topping, you still get to the same location,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:12 amTOH @123, note that this lesbian couple used almost exactly the same words as the Canadian lesbians to describe how they felt after they found out the Christian jeweler who made them their wedding rings was a Christian who had a sign in his shop expressing his religious views about marriage.
Don’t doubt for a second that there is a script, and a playbook at work here. This is why it’s important to keep track of what goes on in Canada, and in Europe.
Steve57 (4c9797) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:16 amnarciso, if you could say that in English, that would be helpful.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:17 amI coast through life without occassioning no oppressions due to my baking choices
i am truly blessed
happyfeet (82d3c4) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:21 amit doesn’t matter what tactic is used, as long as one sells the product,
http://www.hulu.com/watch/61320
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:21 am*occasioning* I mean
happyfeet (82d3c4) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:23 amI guess that is the innate problem of “positive rights”, what one person thinks is positive is not for another.
Just remember, “You can’t legislate morality” (but apparently you can impose it through court rulings).
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/6/2015 @ 9:51 amHow so? How does marriage help this along? The equal protection case was already well-established, and is no stronger now than it was a few weeks ago.
Um, no. That’s the difference between the Charter and the Bill of Rights; the Charter, like its European equivalent, is just strong suggestions, to be constantly weighed against other considerations, while the Bill of Rights is the supreme law of the land. Yes, it can be outweighed when a sufficiently compelling government interest can’t be achieved in any other way, but that’s a very high bar to clear. Even Bob Jones only lost its tax exemption.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/6/2015 @ 11:09 amYes, one of them sleeps all the time while the other tosses and turns, which does not do wonders for their “married” life.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 7/6/2015 @ 11:10 amonce upon a time, that was true, but the court seems to hold priorities of positive over negative rights,
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/6/2015 @ 11:13 amnothing is over:
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2015/07/06/eric-holder-u-s-may-need-to-sue-to-enforce-gay-marriage-ruling/
narciso (ee1f88) — 7/6/2015 @ 11:30 am