pam Posted July 5, 2015 Report Share Posted July 5, 2015 With the recent fining of an Oregon couple for refusing to bake a wedding cake, how does the Oregon law regarding discrimination work towards an LDS Bishop who refuses to officiate a marriage between a gay couple? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JojoBag Posted July 12, 2015 Report Share Posted July 12, 2015 Currently, he is covered under the First Amendment. No state can enact laws that conflict with the Constitution. That said, it will only be a matter of time before the Supremes will rule that any church that does not recognize homosexual marriage is violating the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LiterateParakeet Posted July 12, 2015 Report Share Posted July 12, 2015 Do you mean the story about Sweet Cakes by Melissa? If so, this blog might make you feel a little better....the case was not simply about refusing to sell the homosexual couple a cake, but about doxxing them. I didn't know what "doxxing" was until I read the article. Basically, the couple filed a complaint, and the complaint including the name and address of the person making it was forwarded to Sweet Cakes by Melissa....they then posted the entire complaint including the lesbian couples HOME ADDRESS on their blog. The Lesbian couple started getting death threats afterwards. That is what the fines were about. Doxxing is not a Christian behavior. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2015/07/sweet-cakes-by-melissa-didnt-just-deny-a-lesbian-couple-service-they-also-doxxed-them-and-their-kids.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted July 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2015 I don't mean just this particular case, I'm asking in general due to Oregon laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Str8Shooter Posted July 12, 2015 Report Share Posted July 12, 2015 (edited) Technically the Oregon Equality Act (2007) has a religious exemption so their shouldn't be any question- LDS and other leaders can deny services based on religious beliefs and be protected. My opinion is the whole Sweet Cakes cake thing is that it's a dog and pony show in which the business owners have been wronged. The baker has some fault- he was really rude. The gay couple freaked out, and from there it just escalated. If the baker had been polite and/or the gay couple not freaked out, none of this would probably have happened. I feel the Oregon BOLI court is a cruel joke. The judge in this case is not actually a judge. The "judge" that made the ruling was appointed by the commissioner, who is also the person who filed the charges. So you literally have the judge's boss filing charges in the court. On top of this, the commissioner has been in close contact with LGBT groups and the content of the emails is suspicious. It screams conflict of interest. The gay couple listed 178 symptoms resulting from physical and mental damage, yet no doctor or mental specialist ever testified. The witnesses to back those claims were a mother, brother, and close friend. The doxxing claims may have some base, but I cannot see how it is illegal when it clearly states in the complaint form that the information will become public record and that a copy might be sent to the business or person you are complaining about. When the "incident" took place, same-sex marriage was expressly illegal in Oregon. A precedent has been set that someone can be fined under the OEA for refusing to participate in or support an illegal act. Again, dog and pony show with a side of cat herding. Edited July 12, 2015 by Str8Shooter Leah, Vort and yjacket 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.