Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
betsy

California Judge Rules In Favor Of Christian

Recommended Posts

Who would've thought this would happen?  In California to boot!  Finally.......reason seems to be coming back.

 

This must be a precedent!

 

Quote

U.S. judge rules it would be ‘tyranny’ to force Christian to bake cake for lesbian ‘marriage’

Cathy Miller owns Tastries Bakery, where 40 percent of her business is wedding cakes, many of which she personally designs.  Last August two lesbians asked her to design a special cake to celebrate their “marriage,” and Miller politely redirected them to an accommodating competitor.  

Nevertheless, as is the well-established LGBT pattern, the lesbians sued Miller anyway. They filed a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing, accusing Miller of violating California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which criminalizes denying service based on sexual orientation

 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-stuff-of-tyranny-christian-baker-scores-major-victory

 

It is indeed tyranny!  To have let this go on, which saw some folks lose their business over frivolous lawsuits by senseless LGBT activists, is what's so disgusting about this!   How many cases involved premeditation and malice - to actually pick out known Christian entrepreneurs to bully?

Not only  does this kind of frivolity clutters the justice system....but it also disrupts businesses, and lives!  How many employees lose their jobs when a small business goes under because of this?  It has its own ripple effect!

 

There should be some penalties for LGBT activists who indulge in this kind of shenanigans.  If they lose the case, the plaintiff must shoulder all the expenses incurred by the defendant in defending himself - which include his legal expenses (and punitive damages)!

Edited by betsy
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

A California judge refused this week to order a baker to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, ruling that to do otherwise would be to trample on the baker’s free speech rights.

Superior Court Judge David R. Lampe said in his Monday ruling that wedding cakes run to the core of the First Amendment.

“It is an artistic expression by the person making it that is to be used traditionally as a centerpiece in the celebration of a marriage. There could not be a greater form of expressive conduct,” the judge wrote.

 

His decision contrasts with a ruling out of Colorado, where a court ruled that a baker could not refuse to bake for a same-sex couple, arguing the state’s public accommodation law trumped that baker’s First Amendment claims. That case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/6/judge-rules-california-cant-force-christian-baker-/

 

Let's see how it ends up with the case in Colorado.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I resent fake Christians trying to make people think their desire to discriminate and make others second-class citizens is just part of their Christianity. I hope Christ has a special place in hell for those who use his name to spread their hate and contempt for others. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, betsy said:

which saw some folks lose their business over frivolous lawsuits by senseless LGBT activists,

I'm not sure I totally agree with the lawsuits being "frivolous."  To an extent - yes.  I mean, it's a friggin' cake, after all.

On the other hand, it is "tyranny" for Christians to discriminate and refuse service to others based on their own harsh, rigid interpretations of the Bible.  I mean, it's a friggin' cake, after all.

Baking the cake would be an opportunity to show Christ-like love, create relationships and support people without judgement no matter what their choices are. I believe that was Jesus' point when he came to earth.

The only upside to these lawsuits that I see - it turns a lot of people off religion.  I'll take a lesbian or gay couple over a self-righteous, judgemental, critical, hate-spewing religious nutter any day.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, betsy said:

Who would've thought this would happen?  In California to boot!  Finally.......reason seems to be coming back.

This is totally unlike the previous case, and if you read the article you linked that will be abundantly clear. I have mentioned this difference many times in the past in reference to the earlier case and it seems the judge Lampe agrees with me.

The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids,

The analogy I used many times in the past for the other case is that the baker was not required to bake a cake in the shape of a penis, just sell to a gay couple. This case is completely consistent, as Charles LiMandri of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund stated: “Cathy will gladly serve anyone, including same-sex couples, but Cathy will not use her artistic talents to express messages that conflict with her sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“My teachers have always pushed me over the cliff, and that is what has awakened my compassion for what human beings are up against. I am afraid that because of where we come from as Westerners, with our Judeo-Christian heritage, that if you get too focused on doctrine, on codifying, or ethics as a major emphasis, it just turns into harsh judgment. And then there is no genuine compassion.”

~~ Pema Chodron ~~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

What's next...forcing Christian doctors to perform abortions ?

You obviously didn't read the article. But Christian doctors might not be allowed to refuse to treat women who have had abortions because they disapprove of their lifestyle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LonJowett said:

You obviously didn't read the article. But Christian doctors might not be allowed....

 

Haven't you heard ?   "Abortions" are also artistic expression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Goddess said:

I'm not sure I totally agree with the lawsuits being "frivolous."  To an extent - yes.  I mean, it's a friggin' cake, after all.

On the other hand, it is "tyranny" for Christians to discriminate and refuse service to others based on their own harsh, rigid interpretations of the Bible.  I mean, it's a friggin' cake, after all.

Baking the cake would be an opportunity to show Christ-like love, create relationships and support people without judgement no matter what their choices are. I believe that was Jesus' point when he came to earth.

The only upside to these lawsuits that I see - it turns a lot of people off religion.  I'll take a lesbian or gay couple over a self-righteous, judgemental, critical, hate-spewing religious nutter any day.  

 

If the cake is already made, and is for sale - the baker can't exclude anyone from buying. Here's the explanation by the judge:

Quote

 

“The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids,” Judge Lampe’s ruling reads. “For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech.”

The judge issued his ruling Monday, stating it would only be discrimination if Miller refused to sell an existing product to the lesbians. He discerned that forcing a business owner to violate his/her beliefs is “the stuff of tyranny.”

 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-stuff-of-tyranny-christian-baker-scores-major-victory

 

It is frivolous.   And, bullying.

Anyway, who would  force someone to prepare something they're going to eat?  Only a dingbat!

Ever heard of cooks spitting on food when they're pissed about someone?  I know - having been in business that deals with restaurant cooks - I've been told about those! 

 

If I'm a guest at a wedding, and I know the legal battle that went on between the baker and the couple (and the baker is under duress)  - I'll skip the cake.

 

Why mar what should've been a joyous occasion with.......lawsuits?  It's not like as if there's only one friggin' baker!

 

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ?Impact said:

This is totally unlike the previous case, and if you read the article you linked that will be abundantly clear. I have mentioned this difference many times in the past in reference to the earlier case and it seems the judge Lampe agrees with me.

The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids,

The analogy I used many times in the past for the other case is that the baker was not required to bake a cake in the shape of a penis, just sell to a gay couple. This case is completely consistent, as Charles LiMandri of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund stated: “Cathy will gladly serve anyone, including same-sex couples, but Cathy will not use her artistic talents to express messages that conflict with her sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage.

If cakes are already baked and for sale to the public - yes, the baker cannot refuse to sell to anyone.    The ruling is about custom-made cakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's Christian to love sinners.  This person is being allowed to define their own version of the religion.  Holy slippery slope, Batjesus !

Maybe she does love them.  Maybe she just doesn't want to work for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

What's next...forcing Christian doctors to perform abortions ?

No need to force them. They are already doing so by choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LonJowett said:

You obviously didn't read the article. But Christian doctors might not be allowed to refuse to treat women who have had abortions because they disapprove of their lifestyle.

Christian bakers don't refuse selling to homosexuals their already-baked stuffs that's sold to the public.  So, there!

 

This baker, also gave referral to a competition,  to help them out.

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LonJowett said:

I resent fake Christians trying to make people think their desire to discriminate and make others second-class citizens is just part of their Christianity. I hope Christ has a special place in hell for those who use his name to spread their hate and contempt for others. 

Let's not get all tied up in a knot over something that's not about us, personally.   Even if we are gay!   Like as if the world hangs on our personal "wisdom," and every word we say. 

 

What you think.....and what you resent......... isn't the issue.  

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Omni said:

No need to force them. They are already doing so by choice.

Just like there are also many bakers who cater to SSM, by choice..........there are also many doctors who perform abortion by choice. 

It's those that are being force to go against their religious belief - that's where the problem lies.

 

 

For the life of me.....why don't these homosexual couples go to bakers who would gladly bake for their wedding! 

Who in their right mind, would dampen the joyous spirit of their union......by forcing an unwilling to take part in it?  

 

It seems  the marriage becomes just secondary to the ideology, huh?  Having a petulant fit.... and forcing someone unwilling, seems to have taken priority.    Not a good way to start a marriage.

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Goddess said:

“My teachers have always pushed me over the cliff, and that is what has awakened my compassion for what human beings are up against. I am afraid that because of where we come from as Westerners, with our Judeo-Christian heritage, that if you get too focused on doctrine, on codifying, or ethics as a major emphasis, it just turns into harsh judgment. And then there is no genuine compassion.”

~~ Pema Chodron ~~

Irrelevant!

Furthermore.....

We're not talking about HERITAGE.  Or, inherited faith!  Enlighten Perma Chodron, that Christianity, isn't achieved through inheritance.  Just because you're born and raised by a Christian family doesn't automatically makes you a Christian. 

 

This is about PRACTICED faith!    Judeo-Christian faith, that's being actively practiced.

Having compassion, doesn't mean one has to throw away his God! 

 

 

COMPASSION SHOULD WORK BOTH WAYS.   It shouldn't be seen as a one-way street!

The Christian having compassion in his heart over someone with the burden of a grievous sin, and is living in direct conflict with God (we all have our own crosses to bear)......

 

..........and the homosexual couple having compassion over a religious person, who's trying to balance tolerance with his religious belief!

 

This baker had even referred them to particular establishments (his competition), as a way of helping them out!   Good grief - people and their sense of entitlements!

 

 

Anyway.....

There is harsh judgement at the end of everything - whether you see it or not:  that's what a Christian believes.   That's why a Christian will not want to participate in idolatry, or anything that would offend God. What do you think all those warnings by God is all about?  You think,  hell isn't harsh enough?  :D

 

Oh boy...... all these la-la platitudes by those whose heads are up in the clouds,  will get you all twisted too.  Cutesy, feel-good words won't help if they're not consistent with the Scriptures.   Not good, if one is trying to adhere to Christianity. 

 

 

 

Although the anti-religious want to sell it that way, or ignorantly think it is.......it's not about hating.  It's about adhering to religious belief - which of course, the non-religious would find hard to understand. 

How can one understand having religious faith like Christianity....when you haven't even experienced it, don't know much about the Scriptures........ or, don't believe in God?

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, betsy said:

Let's not get all tied up in a knot over something that's not about us, personally.   Even if we are gay!   Like as if the world hangs on our personal "wisdom," and every word we say. 

 

What you think.....and what you resent......... isn't the issue.  

I believe I am still allowed to express my opinion and call a fake a fake. It's important that we not allow evil people to mislabel Christianity and claim it as their own, as this has caused others to think it's an ugly hateful agenda and it is in reality quite beautiful. 

Edited by LonJowett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, LonJowett said:

I believe I am still allowed to express my opinion and call a fake a fake. It's important that we not allow evil people to mislabel Christianity and claim it as their own, as this has caused others to think it's an ugly hateful agenda and it is in reality quite beautiful. 

Did I say you're not allowed to express your opinion?  I'm responding to your OPINION!   Surely, I'm allowed to do that?

 

I'm saying your opinion is silly, irrelevant.....since it's not about what you think, or what you resent.  

What you think is a fake Christian, or not - is your opinion reliable?  NO!  Because, it's clearly based on ignorance!

 

Furthermore.......

......this isn't about how a Christian should interpret the Bible.  It's about what the individual believes!

 

You may not agree how the individual interprets his Bible - but that's none of your business.  It's his religious belief - not yours!  He has his right to both his religious belief, and his freedom to express!  Read the article.

That's what I'm saying.

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, LonJowett said:

It's important that we not allow evil people to mislabel Christianity and claim it as their own, as this has caused others to think it's an ugly hateful agenda and it is in reality quite beautiful. 

I can say the same thing:

 

We should not allow evil people to mislabel Christianity and claim it as their own, as this has caused others to think it's an ugly hateful agenda and it is in reality quite beautiful. 

 

Contrary to what others who hadn't really read the Bible try to sell, there is nothing hateful about not wanting to offend God, and trying to adhere to His stipulations.  OBEDIENCE is right up there with the very first commandment!

 

Here.  Read it! Jesus Christ did not change anything about the law! 

 

Matthew 5:17-20

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

 

Christ had expanded, more like it!

 

Matthew 5

27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, betsy said:

I can say the same thing:

 

We should not allow evil people to mislabel Christianity and claim it as their own, as this has caused others to think it's an ugly hateful agenda and it is in reality quite beautiful. 

 

Contrary to what others who hadn't really read the Bible try to sell, there is nothing hateful about not wanting to offend God, and trying to adhere to His stipulations.  OBEDIENCE is right up there with the very first commandment!

 

Here.  Read it! Jesus Christ did not change anything about the law! 

 

Matthew 5:17-20

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 Don't bear false witness trying to tell me a commandment was broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LonJowett said:

 Don't bear false witness trying to tell me a commandment was broken.

 Surely you don't think it's only the 10 Commandments that are to be followed? Homosexuality is right up there alongside adultery and idolatry!

 

A sin is a sin.  It is an offense against God. 

 

Quote

Question: "What does the New Testament say about homosexuality?"

Answer:
The Bible is consistent through both Old and New Testaments in confirming that homosexuality is sin (
Genesis 19:1–13; Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:26–27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; Jude 1:7).

In this matter, the New Testament reinforces what the Old Testament had declared since the Law was given to Moses (Leviticus 20:13).

The difference between the Old and New Testaments is that the New Testament offers hope and restoration to those caught up in the sin of homosexuality through the redeeming power of Jesus.

It is the same hope that is offered to anyone who chooses to accept it (John 1:12; 3:16–18).

https://www.gotquestions.org/New-Testament-homosexuality.html

 

 

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, betsy said:

 Surely you don't think it's only the 10 Commandments that are to be followed? Homosexuality is right up there alongside adultery and idolatry!

 

A sin is a sin.  It is an offense against God. 

 

https://www.gotquestions.org/New-Testament-homosexuality.html

 

 

 

Then why were you quoting about commandments? Are you misrepresenting God's commandments to justify your contempt for your neighbour? That is a sin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...