"Baker refuses to make wedding cake for lesbian couple and 'calls them...

[Fang]

I've been opposed to gay marriage, but I'm going to side with the lesbian couple on this one. Sounds to me the baker is using his religion as an excuse. I could understand if he was being asked to perform the ceremony. I would think religion would apply there. But refusing to bake a cake for certain customers IMO is discrimination. He cannot use his religion here.

[Baltimatt]

Thank you, Fang.

[songfourone]

It is an interesting question, if there were only one baker. My answer is that there is more than one bakery and that the lesbian couple could find another bakery fairly easily. Unless it is a discrimination against a protected class with special rights, I believe that business has the right to choose with whom they do or do not transact business. I also support the right of people to choose not to do buy goods or services if they choose not to. I also support the right of someone who has been rejected from a business establishment to get on Yelp or Google Comments and tear the business a new one.

I appreciate the opinions of those who disagree with me, but I also object to classes of people who use their special rights status to hammer businesses and shake them down. I have seen rings of unscrupulous and sanctioned attorneys, for example, who took on thousands of frivolous ADA lawsuits over parking spaces or railings in a bathroom. I do not believe that shoving their beliefs down everyone's throats does them any service, with respect to further public support for their cause.

I suppose all those "frivolous" lawsuits over railings in bathrooms, until you need those hand railings, they are frivolous.

Do you really have that much contempt for the handicapped?

[Fang]

Thank you, Fang.

No need to thank me. IMO this is clearly a case of discrimination and that hurts all of us whether some people realize it or not.

[musicmd]

It is an interesting question, if there were only one baker. My answer is that there is more than one bakery and that the lesbian couple could find another bakery fairly easily. Unless it is a discrimination against a protected class with special rights, I believe that business has the right to choose with whom they do or do not transact business. I also support the right of people to choose not to do buy goods or services if they choose not to. I also support the right of someone who has been rejected from a business establishment to get on Yelp or Google Comments and tear the business a new one.

I appreciate the opinions of those who disagree with me, but I also object to classes of people who use their special rights status to hammer businesses and shake them down. I have seen rings of unscrupulous and sanctioned attorneys, for example, who took on thousands of frivolous ADA lawsuits over parking spaces or railings in a bathroom. I do not believe that shoving their beliefs down everyone's throats does them any service, with respect to further public support for their cause.

The law only works when it applies to everyone.

[kudzu]

I've been opposed to gay marriage, but I'm going to side with the lesbian couple on this one. Sounds to me the baker is using his religion as an excuse. I could understand if he was being asked to perform the ceremony. I would think religion would apply there. But refusing to bake a cake for certain customers IMO is discrimination. He cannot use his religion here.

Thank you, Fang.

How about personal, non-religious beliefs, matt ? You ok with that ?

[Baltimatt]

kudzu--

If your personal, non-religious belief is that same-sex marriage is wrong, I certainly support your right not to marry someone of the same sex.

[kudzu]

kudzu--

If your personal, non-religious belief is that same-sex marriage is wrong, I certainly support your right not to marry someone of the same sex.

My personal, non-religious belief is that same sex "marriage" is an oxymoron.

Oil & water.

And logic supports my position.

[Anne68]

Now if it was a black couple( man & women) the baker would have major problems.

Wow...just wow...

[Bmoreteacher]

Wow...just wow...

What exactly do you disagree with about that statement?

[Monte]

I suppose all those "frivolous" lawsuits over railings in bathrooms, until you need those hand railings, they are frivolous.

Do you really have that much contempt for the handicapped?

This is Monte's autoresponder: Sorry, Monte doesn't answer posts that are intentionally baiting. If you would like a response from him, please first construct an intelligent comment. Beep!

[Monte]

The law only works when it applies to everyone.

Everyone should have special rights?

[Baltimatt]

Everyone should have special rights?

What special rights are you talking about?

[Monte]

What special rights are you talking about?

Matt, I don't think that anyone here has any problems with affording equal rights, and if two heterosexuals walked in, ordered a cake and the store proprietor refused them service, it would be no big deal.

Special rights are afforded to protected classes or people (race, gender, religion, handicapped). It is against the law to discriminate against protected classes of individuals. For example, a landlord cannot refuse to rent to someone simply based on racial factors. I realize now, of course, this means that now that I said that, SongFourOne will automatically ask me why I have contempt for people of other races, but that's a chance I have to take.

[Monte]

I suppose all those "frivolous" lawsuits over railings in bathrooms, until you need those hand railings, they are frivolous.

In less than 0 seconds flat, I found http://adaabuse.com/, that spotlights the happenings from the Golden State, California, but I'm sure there is plenty to go around.

SongFourOne, meet California disbarred former attorney Theodore Arthur Pinnock.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/153434

Pinnock filed 76 civil rights claims on behalf of a single client under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Disabled Persons Act. The client had not consented to each case. Over the course of six months, Pinnock settled 15 cases and received settlement checks totaling $27,300 but did not deposit the funds in a client trust account. Although he was entitled to a substantial share of the money, he misappropriated the entire amount. He also did not promptly remove fees he had earned, instead leaving the money in his trust account to pay personal expenses as needed.

The total of the settlements of the 76 cases was $143,425. Pinnock claimed to have settled 25 of the cases, but there is no evidence of a settlement amount. He gave his client $8,500.

Meet Jim Cohan, serial ADA litigant.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...les&id=8329671

A man who has filed well over a hundred lawsuits against local small-business owners says he's an advocate for the disabled. His critics say what he does is harassment and extortion.

James Farkus Cohan says he's disabled with end-stage emphysema. He sues small businesses, claiming those businesses are violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Cohan has filed at least 161 lawsuits.

Here's a sanction levied against a swell couple among the ADA "Frequent Filer Club"
http://adaabuse.com/images/128_7FeeOrder.pdf

My personal philosophy, as Dennis Miller put it more more eloquently, is that I have no problem with helping the helpless, but I have a big problem with helping the clueless. When a disabled guy files 161 different lawsuits against small businesses, you might say that I consider THAT guy to be clueless.

[Baltimatt]

I'm trying to follow you here, Monte.

Matt, I don't think that anyone here has any problems with affording equal rights, and if two heterosexuals walked in, ordered a cake and the store proprietor refused them service, it would be no big deal.

If sexual-orientation discrimination is against the law and this couple were discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, then we have a problem here.

Special rights are afforded to protected classes or people (race, gender, religion, handicapped). It is against the law to discriminate against protected classes of individuals. For example, a landlord cannot refuse to rent to someone simply based on racial factors. I realize now, of course, this means that now that I said that, SongFourOne will automatically ask me why I have contempt for people of other races, but that's a chance I have to take.

Since for the most part people find themselves in these "protected classes," how are they special rights? A white person should have just as much protection against racial discrimination as a black person, a Christian as much protection against religious discrimination as a Muslim, etc.

[RavnFreek]

It would be such a wonderful world if we allowed business owners to discriminate against people for irrational reasons, you're right!

Why? You already know this guy's beliefs. There is no way you or another homosexual would give him your business anyhow. He's not hiding the fact that he doesn't like you.

He's an ignorant jackazz but he has the right to be, Just take your business elsewhere. Why do you want to force YOUR beliefs on HIM?

[regularguy]

There is no way you or another homosexual would give him your business anyhow.

Isn't that what the incident was all about - a lesbian couple trying to give him their business and being turned away for illegally discriminatory reasons?

[sigmalady]

If a heterosexual came in to order a cake as a gift for a gay wedding and the baker refused, would he/she be able to sue?

[Baltimatt]

sigmalady

I don't see why not, if the denial of service was based on sexual orientation.