Skip to comments.
Judge Rules In Favor Of California Baker Who Refused To Bake Wedding Cake For Same-Sex Couple
https://www.10news.com ^
| Dec 14, 2017
| Johana Restrepo
Posted on 12/18/2017 3:41:48 AM PST by Enterprise
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
Similar of course to the case before the USSC now.
To: Enterprise
Remember that the GAYstapo doesn't stumble across these businesses accidentally. They seek them out for the purpose of wrecking them.
2
posted on
12/18/2017 3:43:43 AM PST
by
Vigilanteman
(ObaMao: Fake America, Fake Messiah, Fake Black man. How many fakes can you fit into one Zer0?)
To: Vigilanteman
My suspicions are the same. These are not accidental encounters.
3
posted on
12/18/2017 3:45:03 AM PST
by
Enterprise
(Do away with all symbols of past slavery. Start with the Democrat Party.)
To: Vigilanteman
I’d like to read the judge’s reasoning
4
posted on
12/18/2017 3:47:34 AM PST
by
xzins
(Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory.)
To: Enterprise
5
posted on
12/18/2017 3:49:26 AM PST
by
Jim Robinson
(Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!)
To: Enterprise
6
posted on
12/18/2017 3:49:27 AM PST
by
Jim Robinson
(Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!)
To: Enterprise
7
posted on
12/18/2017 3:49:28 AM PST
by
Jim Robinson
(Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!)
To: Vigilanteman
They bit off more cake than they can chew...
8
posted on
12/18/2017 3:53:07 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
To: Enterprise
These are not accidental encountersOf course not. In almost every endeavor, it does seem that those involved in the gay culture choose association with members of their community. I saw a suggestion a few months back: These bakers and others who are targeted by the gay community should take the job but tell them that profits from the transaction will be given to a (choose one) Christian group that opposes gay marriage.
9
posted on
12/18/2017 3:53:07 AM PST
by
grania
(Deplorable and Proud of It!)
To: grania
That misses the point of the refusal to inscribe.
10
posted on
12/18/2017 3:54:04 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
To: Enterprise
The judge denied a TRO. This is not over for the bakery, not by a long shot.
To: DoodleDawg
It’s still a good move.
The natives are also restless. They are going to put up with bullshit only so long.
12
posted on
12/18/2017 3:57:06 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
It misses the point but it night defer them from the real goal of destroying Christian-oriented businesses. I submit the troublemakers wouldn’t do this if they knew their money would be used against their agenda.
13
posted on
12/18/2017 3:58:21 AM PST
by
grania
(Deplorable and Proud of It!)
To: Enterprise
The Mrs and I have had a few conversations about this. We both personally feel that the people should just bake them a cake.
However, if the government uses it’s hammer to force people to violate their honest personal religious beliefs, we have a problem. There is no harm in not baking a cake or partaking in a homosexual ceremony. No ones rights are violated, just go elsewhere!
And yes, the gaystapo searches out places for just this purpose.
14
posted on
12/18/2017 4:00:24 AM PST
by
vpintheak
(Freedom is not equality; and equality is not freedom!)
To: grania
No, we need to support Christians standing pat. No halfway for their rights if we want blessing. No confused compromise.
15
posted on
12/18/2017 4:04:48 AM PST
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Tryin' hard to win the No-Bull Prize.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
Its still a good move. Certainly it's of benefit to the bakery but this is the first round only. The Supreme Court decision this summer is going to be the key milestone.
To: Enterprise
A California judge we’re talking about here. This is earth-shaking, so put all your breakables down low.
17
posted on
12/18/2017 4:22:37 AM PST
by
Eleutheria5
(“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
To: Eleutheria5
I’m surprised it took your post, #17, to point out the Big Deal here, i.e., that this was a judge in CALIFORNIA.
To: vpintheak
My take has been and will always be....I am not obligated, by any reasoning, to participate in someone's wedding.
Certainly the government cannot force me.
Let's say I got an invitation and have these beliefs and not only RSVP...but put the reason as "don't believe in same sex marriage" on the RSVP. Could my "friends" take me to court?
To: Enterprise
Queers don’t have weddings. Queers have contract signings
20
posted on
12/18/2017 4:31:58 AM PST
by
Thibodeaux
(2018 is looking good)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson