Bakers Accused of Hate Get Emotional Day in Court

This is where you can check. I checked all dates in March and April.

https://web.courts.oregon.gov/sca/WebMediaRel.nsf/COA?OpenView&Start=1&Count=1000

 

Actually, excluding anybody for any reason would be discrimination.

 

Especially considering that they went to another Baker and got the same cake at a better price.

Wonder why the bar owner who got fined $400,000 never gets any media.
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2015/09/oregon_court_of_appeals_uphold.html

Stupid ****ing laws!

 

Yeah, something is seriously wrong with our culture if we rank denial of service higher up on our yardstick of offense than...ya know...lying, cheating, stealing, harming someone due to negligence, etc. Other companies barely get a slap on the wrist and a "now come on guys, you shouldn't be doing that" for stuff orders of magnitude worse. But, if you deny service to someone? All of sudden that's crossing the proverbial red line? Don't get me wrong. They should be fined. But, the punishment must be proportional to the offense. Being denied a cake isn't worth $135,000...not even close.

 

Stop with the false dichotomy.

If you do not understand the difference between molesting a child - and consensual sex- you need help.

 

They were not fined for not serving a cake. They were fined for publishing personal information on Facebook.

 

Speaking of false dichotomy, incest is not automatically child molestation or even some form of non-consensual action. Two grown related adults can willingly engage in incest. There is even a couple of stories that have been in the news over the past couple of decades, where siblings separated at birth have met, unknowingly, married and in some cases had kids, before finding out. Some separated when they found out, but others stayed together. This is before you consider that legally speaking, incest isn't limited to blood relations in most states.

 

What does consensual relations between two adults - incest or otherwise- have to do with child molestation ?

Since I never said that incest was necessarily child molestation ... and do not even use the term incest in my post ... why are you posting as if I did ? (Straw man)

 

No you didn't but the post you replied to did. And quite a number of people equate incest to child molestation. Now I will admit that I missed in Robert's post "cakes enabling molesters" which is, I'm willing to bet the part that you falsely added the child appendage too. My point still stands of the false dichotomy, since molestation as well is not limited to children as the victims. Basically you throwing in the child part would be the strawman.

 

Well ... I am not one of those people. Logic is not my weak suit.

What some have tried to do is equate gay marriage to pedophilia/child molestation. This is non sequitur - it does not follow. It does not follow that because two consenting adults of the same sex want to get married that they are pedophiles.

This is the point I was making.