Ah, the intolerantly “Tolerant” bullies are at it again.
He should just bake it. And replace the chocolate with ex-lax
If you’re a gay couple and want some easy money, all you have to do is find a Christian or Orthodox Jew bakery, then order a gay cake. No cake? Then file a lawsuit, and ask for punitive damages.
But I do think it’s odd that you never read about a gay couple harassing a Muslim-owned bakery.
So he’s the only baker in Denver they could find, to bake their gender transition cake??
Aren’t there other businesses who would gladly bake their cake? Isn’t it obvious that they decided to pick on this guy, so they can trigger a lawsuit, after they go into their outrage mode, that this guy won’t bake their cake???
We need an end to this crap. Sick of it.
From the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
Patriots who value their constitutionally enumerated protections should note that Acts 22:25-29 shows that Paul used his Roman citizenship to save himself from being flogged.
Bullying and harassment by the commie left. Time for somebody to go to jail and it isn’t the baker.
Make it his own design and drape it in black, make it as pitiful and sorrowful as can be and say this is the only type of this kind of cake he makes.
I’ll bake your cake, but it’ll cost you 10,000 dollars.
Time to locate the masterpiece cake shop somewhere in Texas.
It is obvious that the state of Colorado is hot after this baker because he refuses to accommodate homosexuality in their attempt to wear down resistance of people to their perversion. Let us take this one to the Supreme Court. There should be a penalty for the State for trying to prosecute him again on the same grounds. Colorado is getting really questionable.
And SCOTUS did not actually decide if the Baker could refuse to make cakes, etc, based on his religious beliefs.
Which sends a message that if the Colorado Commission had treated Philips better then they might have had a viable justification for their case, which is absurd. For contrary to so much misrepresentation of the case, even (well, not “even”) here on CF, the FACTS are that:
1. Jack Philips did not refuse to provide the homosexuals any service at all or just any cake.
2. The item the couple requested was a special creation that usually must be contracted for well in advance, costing hundreds of dollars, for an expressed purpose, that the couple expressed was for celebrating (in CO) their MA homosexual “marriage.”
3. Any and all homosexual unions are against the law of God , and this marriage was also against the highest state law at the time, as the CO. constitution defined marriage as only btwn one man and one women. In addition, CO did not recognize out-of-state homosexual marriages.
4. When you agree to actually aid someone to do what is illegal, knowing that is and that you aid will indeed by used specifically for that purpose, and are not compelled, then you are complicit* in it, being a “partaker of other men’s sins.” (1 Timothy 5:22)
5. Philips refusal His refusal was not because the couple were homosexuals (he would have refused a straight couple’s request for a cake purposed to celebrate an illicit union), but because of the expressed purpose that wanted it for. Providing which would make Philips complicit in assisting the celebration of a crime.
Therefore the issue of Jack Philips vs. the state of CO should have been a slam dunk case in which CO was manifestly wrong for not only the biased bigotry of the political powers, but due to the fact that Phillips not only was acting in accordance with the law of God but also the highest law of the state at the time, and thus would be complicit in assisting evil if had agreed to contract to create a wedding cake for an illegal wedding.
* In order to obtain a conviction of a defendant for being a principal or an accessory before the fact, the prosecution must prove that the defendant committed an act that either encouraged or actually helped the criminal, that he had the requisite intent of encouraging or helping the criminal [even by wanting to please the customer?], and that the criminal who was encouraged or assisted by the defendant actually committed the crime...
In order to demonstrate that the defendant committed the requisite actus reus, the prosecution must show that the defendant either directly or indirectly encouraged or facilitated the commission of the crime. A person has facilitated a commission of the crime if he provides the criminal with the means that the criminal uses to commit the crime...
Other jurisdictions only require the prosecutor to show that the accomplice knew that his actions would either assist or encourage the commission of a crime. The difference is that, in jurisdictions that require the prosecution to prove only that the accomplice acted while knowing that his actions would aid or encourage the commission of a crime, the accomplice can be convicted even if he did not actually want his actions to aid or encourage the commission of a crime. In these jurisdictions, even if the accomplice was dead-set against his actions being used to encourage or aid in the commission of a crime and even if he did not intend for his actions to aid or encourage the commission of the crime, so long as he knew that his actions would aid or encourage the commission of a crime, he can be convicted as an accomplice. Accomplice Mens Rea and Actus Reus - LawShelf Educational Media (emp. mine)
“Complicit” traces back to the French complice (a partner or associate), which derives from the Latin complex — which means “folded together,” as in the ingredients of a cake. It also means “complex.” There are so many ways to be complicit that you could make trading cards and never collect them all. You can be complicit through action or inaction, speech or silence, association or omission. You can engage in outright collusion, aiding in wrongdoing and lying your way through the cover-up...If we take everyday life “as a moral and social space” in which “our common humanity is created and sustained,” then we must take responsibility not only for what we produce and put into the world but also for how we consume — passively and mindlessly, or actively and critically. - Behind Every Villain Stands Someone ‘Complicit’
The homo left will not let up on this until the guy has to shut down his business, is financially ruined and run out of the state.