He did not refuse to serve this gay couple. He did not turn them away or make them leave the store. He was more than willing to make them a cake, just not a cake decorated so as to celebrate homosexuality, because his religious principle will not allow him to do such a thing. When the U.S. Supreme court tries to force an individual to celebrate something which he or she considers an inherant sin and even force him or her put it in writing, disavoying their god and all that they believe in, in the name of something sinister, then we are all in trouble. This country is in big big trouble.
Kashandra Cambria Jesus spoke with a tax collector who was embezzling money ... Jesus did not participate in that process. Jesus spoke to prostitutes, yes, always admonsihed them to end their immoral behavior... again he did not participate in her activity in any way.
AomiN They sued him because he made a personal religious choice... the choice to make the charge against his business may have been procedural/tactical.
i'm gay and i think the court was right. this would be insane if it was in favor of the couple. just get another baker lol. freedom is a wonderful thing only when it applies to everyone.
Really? You’re gay and don’t see the problem? What if 30% of bakers do not serve you? What if 50% do not? What if there is only one bakery? What if banks do not serve you anymore? What if companies can decide not to serve blacks anymore? Why should a gay person have to search for companies willing to serve him/her? And what do you think how the person will feel after being rejected multiple times?
PW That's how a free market works: If one company refuses to cater for you; Find one that will. I have a feeling social media will make such an endeavour fairly easy.
Dr Soap thank you!!! that’s what I’m saying. When someone has a strict religion you can’t just force them to go against it. They have no other option then to go against their religion or stand by their religion. But for gays or just simply getting a cake just go to another store. You have so many options to choose from and no one has any problems the people getting married gets their cake and the guy doesn’t have to go against his religion. It’s a win win
GOSH!!! I can't believe people go to court for a wedding cake. If a baker doesn't want to make your wedding cake, just find another one that is willing to do so. Why do you need to force someone to provide you a service??
I'm sure the Gay couple were used by some unnamed people of influence and money to push this to the supreme court hoping that they could set a new precedent . Unfortunately for them Hillary and her supreme court picks didn't win.
It's called being money hungry. They probably don't even care about the cake. They just saw it as an opportunity to make some extra cash to help pay for their wedding. I mean honestly they could've just gone somewhere else to get a cake. But no they just wanted to cry wolf so they could try and be a "hero (to no one basically)" on T.V. and try to make some extra cash. But they just wasted everyone's time because the baker is absolutely right, and now, instead, they just look like two inconsiderate, gay, idiots.
Great!!! After all, this Baker offered to bake anything else except a wedding cake. There was no discrimination towards the couple only toward the baker.
James Guthrie James, I think you’re talking about Melissa Sweet Cakes in OR. The CO I baker offered to sell a pre-made cake. He consistently doesn’t make Halloween, Divorce, Racist, Gay Wedding or Cakes w/ indecent messages. AND this baker stopped making cakes.
How can you be so disrespectful Shaze Maza? You should be ashamed of yourself! May God shine his light in your Wicked Dark Disgusting Heart! And also to all the other Ignorant Religious People around the world who are close minded and chose to have there mindset in the time of the Dinosaurs instead of Evolving to Beautiful Loving Spiritual people that are welcoming and non discriminatory towards people for we all Gods Children thank you! Treat people the way you would like to be treated period!
As a Liberal, he has a right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. I couldn't believe this incident made National headlines. The gay couple should've gone elsewhere as I pretty sure many bakeries would've created a wedding cake for them. Instead they took the guy, his family and business to court. It should've been thrown out immediately. The gay couple, Jack's family and business all received unwanted attention, media coverage and threats from both sides. Its simple. If a business denies you for whatever reason, go somewhere else.
I praise the supreme courts decision. The state of Colorado came at him aggressively and so did the civil Rights committee. They open had disdain for the baker who politely refused to endorse their practice. This goes beyond public service. This is about principle and I am glad that both the liberals and conservatives could agree that forcing this man to comply to this state law was unconstitutional and ant-religious in nature. Congratulations Philips.
Good. Because he never refused them service at any time and never asked them to leave. They took it upon themselves to bash this conservative Christian because he wouldn't create a wedding cake for their wedding. They should be ashamed and be liable for his legal fees.
Finally, common sense prevails! If they didn't like the baker, then find another bakery. This nation is founded under God and the baker's 1st Amendment rights were definitely violated. It's his business. For instance, if he doesn't want to serve someone b/c he hates their purple hair, then that should be his right to refuse ANYONE service.
I’m gay and agree with the Supreme Court, I also think pastors shouldn’t be forced to preform gay weddings as well... in fact I think anyone who’s in the private sector should be able to refuse service to anyone thy please. This is America and freedom is negotiable.
Funny how certain characters want “TOLERANCE” yet they show no tolerance except their own SELFISH views. Personally I start to change my views, due to such actions that lack common sense.
Honestly I find it stupid and annoying that this couple tried to sue. The baker was absolutely right, I'm glad he won. However, would they even be able to call it a win if the court had ruled in their favor? I mean, you can't force someone to approve of what you're doing, or to like you, or to accept anything.. So IF they had won, and it forced all bakers and private companies to create cakes or produce products for you against their own free will, morals, and beliefs, are you even sure you would even WANT the service? I mean.. what if some devious people (not this guy in particular - of course) decided to spit in your cake, compromise, or sabotage your product in some kind of way? You'd never know! I would be terrified honestly.. And although it's illegal to do so, some people are pretty crafty I mean it could be made out to look like a mistake. And this type of thing could happen ALL THE TIME! That's a lose lose situation to me. So you ought to be glad they lost this case just saying..
Take out the variable of religious protection and the even deeper, wider problem is that the consumer, backed by coercive gov, is now forcing businesses to make certain products or provide certain services. Gov regulation of business is presumably about enforcing safe practices, products and services for the public at large regarding those products and services the business owner CHOOSES to make, provide and sell. The regulatory arm of gov quickly becomes heavy-handed and broadly punitive. So that has been a problem in our not-free market for decades. But this baker offered the customers to buy what he currently sells. They refused and dictated to him what he should make and the fake enforcement group called a “commission” issued its dictates and destroyed this man’s business. There are so many deviations from American culture, our Const, Nat Law, free enterprise principles in these coercive transformations of business practice. Protecting religious expression is only one. If we permit continued gov coercion and overreach such as these gay wedding cake cases begin to reveal, soon gay wedding cake bakers and many others will also be forced to make what they choose not to provide in their business. We are confusing the public sphere with the private and will destroy all that is private in the process. Guess who wins then?
The law specifically states, discrimination against, Race, Gender, Sex, Religion and or Creed, no where does the law inlcude who you do, Gay or Straight.
EVEN MY BEAUTIFUL GAY DAUGHTER KNEW THE GAY COMMUNITY WAS GOING AFTER CHRISTIAN OWNED BUSINESSES !... EQUALITY FOR ALL UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAW !🙋🙋🙋🙋
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
We have here a gay couple who is trying to be the biggest bullies on the block. Every one hates bullies. especialy when they are trying to be validated by the courts of law.
I agree with the free market comments. I can’t imagine why someone would even eat a cake from a bakery that does not wish to make it. Love is always the secret ingredient, and if it is not added to the recipe, I can’t imagine the finished product would taste very good.
So my understanding is that certain people in this country believe that they have the right to choose whom to buy from, but no-one has the right to choose whom to sell to.
Maybe I don't understand this situation but I think I would want a baker who got me, my vision and would be completely into creating my dream cake. Sometimes you have to shop around to get the best person for the job.
The argument should be about the fact that forcing someone to do work for someone, no matter what group they say they define themselves by, is called slavery!
What the gay couple did was just plain stupid. They drove to Colorado as a way to gain access to more money. And that was even a waste of gas. Public bus companies are government owned. Trash haulers are government owned. But Jack's Cake shop is not.
Personally, I would not want to force someone who obviously doesn't like me to work for me. If a baker won't make a cake for my fiance and I, we would go somewhere else. But I hope this baker is aware that his homophobia is well know and could negatively affect his business.
The baker NEVER refused service to the gay couple, he refused to make a specialty cake. The couple couple have brought any already made product in the shop.
Good. If your not Gay. You should NOT have to be forced to deal with the fact that this Immoral behavior is being shoved at you in public and further trying to jeopardize your business. How dare them use there "Gayness" to try and Bully someone . Go find a Gay Baker . The right to refuse service is just what it means.
The judge's opinion is worded in such a way that he points a finger more at the baker for being intolerant so this case is not yet settled. Liberals can't stand to lose.
You need to read again. This was not a court case on whether you can sale to gays. It was 100% about forcing someone to enter into a contract that was against their moral views, which is protected by the Constitution whereas there is nothing in the Constitution, nor will ever be, protecting your sexual choice.
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. The court only made a ruling on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's application of the states anti-discrimination law. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
Somewhat true, somewhat misleading. There was only one question put forth and that was not subject to your opinion of 'other bakers' or even other states. This was very specifically about one baker and one state and the question was did CO discriminate/abuse the baker and SCOTUS said yes.
And just three days later today, the Arizona Court of Appeals interprets the U.S. Supreme Court’s _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ decision to protect gay couples’ right to equal access in _Brush & Nib Studio v. Phoenix_ . Phoenix passed a measure prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in public accommodations. Alliance Defending Freedom, the same law firm that represented Masterpiece Cakeshop, filed suit against the law on behalf of Brush & Nib Studio, a for-profit business that sells cards and decorations for weddings. The studio argued that the Phoenix law violates its First Amendment right to freedom of speech by prohibiting it from turning away same-sex couples who wish to celebrate their weddings. Citing _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ , the Arizona Court of Appeals unanimously rejected Brush & Nib's claim saying they may oppose same-sex marriage but the court could not create an exception for anti-gay businesses without inflicting grave and continuing harm on gay people. So the _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ decision was used to uphold Phoenix's anti-discrimination law.
I'm a Christian and I support same-sex marriage. But in this case I also support Masterpiece cakeshop, he is a good person who just simply try his best and peacefully to stick on his religion in God. When we talk about discrimination, no need push too hard and make it become a monster. You will be alright Mr. Jack Phillips, God in your side I'm in your side.
@nellkuo912 There is no such thing as a Christian who supports same-sex marriage. Jesus said he will spit out all lukewarm phony Christians (Rev 3:16). A lukewarm is someone who claims to be Christian but is spiritually uncommitted to God and the teachings of the Bible and the Bible unequivocally condemns same-sex unions. If you don't want to fully commit to the Christian doctrine then you're better off becoming an atheist or pursuing a different faith altogether. God would prefer you either fully commit to him or reject him altogether. There is no middle ground with him, he will send lukewarm phonies like you to an even hotter hell than an atheist.
They wouldn’t like it if somebody goes against the freedom of choosing their sexual orientation. Why do they think it’s okay to change his faith and religious believes? Go to a different store for crying out loud. I’m not a homophobic nor a Christian. I just don’t like the idea of them forcing him to accept what they are! Just leave him alone and move on. The world don’t alway go around your way.
how is this "narrow" 7 to 2 i think CNN needs to go back to school its was a clear cut decision this gay couple just wanted to make a small problem into something much bigger get over yourself your are not above anyone you are just gay that does not make you some type of super human that deserve special treatment for every aspect of your life
...I am sure that was not the only baker. You have rights but so does he. Would I of made the cake yes, but you should not force someone to make you a cake if they do not want to. This is America, the land where you are free to be you and he is free to be him. Let it be. You people are what is wrong with this country and no I don't mean gay people, I mean people that get offended and have to sue people of stupid things like this....It s a waste of the court systems time. You are not fighting the fight for gay people you are just fighting with someone who is standing by his freedom of religion and rights...Get over yourselves seriously...Not worth anyone's time. Go find another baker...
Meg Que gay ppl are some of the nicest ppl I ever met love them everyone knows someone who's gay but if we as Christians don't spread the gospel we ourselves will be held accountable on judgement day.
Let's get one thing clear. He has ZERO issues baking a cake for couples who are on their 2nd or later marriage, a couple who is breaking one of the Top Ten rules, yet suddenly he starts following the Bible as soon as it happens to line up with his own prejudice. God has NOTHING to do with people's views on homosexuality seeing God could personally tell them He has zero problems with it and these people would still hate it all the same.
How would he know if someone was on their second or later marriage unless they specifically told him which some people would just simply ask for a wedding cake? And even if they were you don’t know the reasoning for their previous divorces as someone could have divorced because of adultery which the Bible says it’s ok to get a divorce under those circumstances or if the person unlawfully divorced before getting saved it would be ok for them to marry again after getting saved because at that point God has deliberately forgotten and washed away their sins
Don't you think if you were so concerned about Biblical morality you might ask??? btw, does God forgive that adulterer EVERY night because I'm pretty sure just because God forgives you it doesn't give you a green card to keep committing it. Or, as it really is, God has NOTHING to do with this because if He did then the same would apply to gay people as it does, with you, when it comes to adultery. It's just classic you guys have ZERO issues with adultery, a sin so severe it made it to the Top Ten list, a sin so severe Christ preached steadfast against it yet all of a sudden you guys want to claim you're so morally concerned when the "sin" just happens to line up with your own hatred.
Uh, doesn't that same Bible list the Ten Commandments? So odd, his must NOT but the one I does. Or do people like you, and him, just blow off the sins you're committing and instead focus on the ones the line up with your own biases? And, yes, he is entitled to his own opinion but he needs to grow a pair of balls and stop blaming God for them when God obviously has nothing to do with it.
Look, I would have ZERO issues with someone claiming religion as their excuse IF that "religion" didn't only appear when it lines up with their own prejudice. As far as I'm concerned, he can refuse service to anyone he deems fit. The problem I have is when people like him want to play the "morally superior" card when it's obvious they aren't playing with even a tenth of the deck.
Bo Rood ..I have to agree. I was a little disappointed to hear that both of their dissents were so forthright in acknowledging only that it’s discriminatory. I don’t think even the staunchest gay rights advocates would agree that recognizing the divinity of a particular religious right as sacred and another one as not sacred is a form of discrimination. I would argue that it’s simply a form of religious observation which everyone is entitled to. He did not refuse service. He simply declined to create one expressive cake that in his opinion was tantamount to condoning and recognizing the divine union of a same-sex couple.
They dont mean narrow as in the ruling be close. They mean the written decisions from the justices werent very broad and was concise. I'm pretty sure. The person they had on was informative and educational.
The slippery slope argument is applicable here. If the actions of the baker were lawful, he or any other baker can also refuse to do so for an interracial couple: alleging interacial marriage is against his/her religion. In fact, any baker or company can exploit religion to refuse to provide services to a particular person without being questioned because religion is being used. Seems as a means to circumvent laws against discrimination
GOD BLESS those people and their business !!!!!!! we are so praud of them and Jesus praud of you, for you put your religion ahead of your business!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think any business that does not want to service gay people should have a public sign. I’m not gay but would never give my business to a business that discriminates and would rather not unknowingly give them my business.
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
He did not refuse to serve this gay couple. He did not turn them away or make them leave the store. He was more than willing to make them a cake, just not a cake decorated so as to celebrate homosexuality, because his religious principle will not allow him to do such a thing. When the U.S. Supreme court tries to force an individual to celebrate something which he or she considers an inherant sin and even force him or her put it in writing, disavoying their god and all that they believe in, in the name of something sinister, then we are all in trouble. This country is in big big trouble.
"This country is in big big trouble". - Did you not just say that the Christian *won* the case?
Justin Stewart I think he’s trying to say is everyone’s religious belief should be protected by the constitution in the US, not just Christian
Yes!!! Yes!!! Leave that baker alone. He has rights too.
Not A Snack no
The right to discriminate? I think not.
@@swirvinbirds1971 As a muslim who hate lgbt I said yes.
David Cabreón Muñoz Why can’t you just disagree with people? Why do you have to hate them?
David Cabreón Muñoz Ah, okay, your one of those Muslims (total whacko)
Don't ask someone to participate in a celebration they find immoral ... and Don't sue them if they refuse.
Immoral? Have you read the bible? Jesus didn't turn the prostitute away. Do you not sin on a daily basis?
Kashandra Cambria Jesus spoke with a tax collector who was embezzling money ... Jesus did not participate in that process. Jesus spoke to prostitutes, yes, always admonsihed them to end their immoral behavior... again he did not participate in her activity in any way.
Nick Gagnon Nothing sad about peace with God and peace about where I spend eternity. Nothing sad about not participating in immoral behavior.
when it's personal -yes, but he runs a business, they didn't sue him, they sued his business
AomiN They sued him because he made a personal religious choice... the choice to make the charge against his business may have been procedural/tactical.
i'm gay and i think the court was right. this would be insane if it was in favor of the couple. just get another baker lol. freedom is a wonderful thing only when it applies to everyone.
Really? You’re gay and don’t see the problem?
What if 30% of bakers do not serve you? What if 50% do not? What if there is only one bakery? What if banks do not serve you anymore? What if companies can decide not to serve blacks anymore? Why should a gay person have to search for companies willing to serve him/her? And what do you think how the person will feel after being rejected multiple times?
PW That's how a free market works: If one company refuses to cater for you; Find one that will. I have a feeling social media will make such an endeavour fairly easy.
PW Only if Islam is allowed to take over.
Totally agree find another Baker the other Baker just lost a costumer and money his lost why make a big deal out of it
M Torpea What's done is done. They decided he did nothing wrong. The right decision was made. No point in crying over it lol
GO TO ANOTHER BAKERY THEN.
Dizzle That’s pointless. If the guy says no, then leave.
Dizzle I do agree with you make a sign ..
Jules Cirilo The guy probably had a cross up. That’s a sign.
Dr Soap thank you!!! that’s what I’m saying. When someone has a strict religion you can’t just force them to go against it. They have no other option then to go against their religion or stand by their religion. But for gays or just simply getting a cake just go to another store. You have so many options to choose from and no one has any problems the people getting married gets their cake and the guy doesn’t have to go against his religion. It’s a win win
Dizzle, this is 2018. You don't need a sign anymore go online and complain all you want about no gay wedding cakes and the word will get out.
GOSH!!! I can't believe people go to court for a wedding cake. If a baker doesn't want to make your wedding cake, just find another one that is willing to do so. Why do you need to force someone to provide you a service??
Jonad Jons exactly
LGBTQIA = overgrown toddlers.
I'm sure the Gay couple were used by some unnamed people of influence and money to push this to the supreme court hoping that they could set a new precedent . Unfortunately for them Hillary and her supreme court picks didn't win.
Jonad Jons Right, let the market decide. Wedding cakes are expensive, so I hear. I'm sure he was not the only Baker in town.
It's called being money hungry. They probably don't even care about the cake. They just saw it as an opportunity to make some extra cash to help pay for their wedding. I mean honestly they could've just gone somewhere else to get a cake. But no they just wanted to cry wolf so they could try and be a "hero (to no one basically)" on T.V. and try to make some extra cash. But they just wasted everyone's time because the baker is absolutely right, and now, instead, they just look like two inconsiderate, gay, idiots.
Great!!! After all, this Baker offered to bake anything else except a wedding cake. There was no discrimination towards the couple only toward the baker.
You are super pretty
James Guthrie James, I think you’re talking about Melissa Sweet Cakes in OR. The CO I baker offered to sell a pre-made cake. He consistently doesn’t make Halloween, Divorce, Racist, Gay Wedding or Cakes w/ indecent messages. AND this baker stopped making cakes.
How can you be so disrespectful Shaze Maza? You should be ashamed of yourself! May God shine his light in your Wicked Dark Disgusting Heart! And also to all the other Ignorant Religious People around the world who are close minded and chose to have there mindset in the time of the Dinosaurs instead of Evolving to Beautiful Loving Spiritual people that are welcoming and non discriminatory towards people for we all Gods Children thank you! Treat people the way you would like to be treated period!
7-2 is not very narrow ruling! Liberals try to minimize the magnitude of this victory for religious freedom!
He was exercising his baker's rights. The right not to bake. 😊🍥
Great day for America
Yes, you can say that because it would not be possible in Obama's era.
It’s about time we support freedom of speech.
SUPREME COURT: FINALLY GOT IT RIGHT. AND I LOVE THIS BAKER GOD BLESS YOU.
Michael McCloud yes God bless America
Michael McCloud
👌🏽💜🌈🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I don't believe in religion, and even I know the supreme court got it right!!!! USA USA USA!!!! TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! MAGA BABY!
God bless discrimination??
Rondie Rice God Bless Anyone who Know Choice Over Abomination and Stupidity
Good. Per the 1st amendment, local governments cannot compel a citizen to speech or association.
The major media outlets are saying this is a narrow ruling. How is 7-2 narrow?
Spot on...the Court did good! And now, the baker can sue the State over religious bias!!!!! Love it!
As a Liberal, he has a right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. I couldn't believe this incident made National headlines. The gay couple should've gone elsewhere as I pretty sure many bakeries would've created a wedding cake for them. Instead they took the guy, his family and business to court. It should've been thrown out immediately. The gay couple, Jack's family and business all received unwanted attention, media coverage and threats from both sides. Its simple. If a business denies you for whatever reason, go somewhere else.
Meg Que let it slide? Why not give them a bad Yelp review? Warn your friends, maybe. It is both your rights to not like each other.
I praise the supreme courts decision. The state of Colorado came at him aggressively and so did the civil Rights committee. They open had disdain for the baker who politely refused to endorse their practice. This goes beyond public service. This is about principle and I am glad that both the liberals and conservatives could agree that forcing this man to comply to this state law was unconstitutional and ant-religious in nature. Congratulations Philips.
Good. Because he never refused them service at any time and never asked them to leave. They took it upon themselves to bash this conservative Christian because he wouldn't create a wedding cake for their wedding. They should be ashamed and be liable for his legal fees.
"Narrow ruling"??? No wonder why your rating are dropping.
Robert SnyperMD Exactly
Finally, common sense prevails! If they didn't like the baker, then find another bakery. This nation is founded under God and the baker's 1st Amendment rights were definitely violated. It's his business. For instance, if he doesn't want to serve someone b/c he hates their purple hair, then that should be his right to refuse ANYONE service.
Meg Que they where only against government because of their experiences with England
Most Americans, Democrats and Republicans, agree with this baker. Good for religious freedom
I don’t let people that don’t like me fix my food. Call me crazy.
Two justices do not value freedom.
I’m gay and agree with the Supreme Court, I also think pastors shouldn’t be forced to preform gay weddings as well... in fact I think anyone who’s in the private sector should be able to refuse service to anyone thy please. This is America and freedom is negotiable.
If someone tried to force me to make a cake for them against my will, I'll take a big steaming dump in the batter.
LGBTQMCsquared Alphabet mob:0
Freedom:1
CBS news how is a 7-2 vote "narrow"???
“We (gay) Christians are being judged”! Nope, sorry. You have already been judged. The word of God has already given you the consequence of your sin.
if u forced someone to make any kind of food, couldn't they spit in it?
I really don’t get it, if people have such a problem with the bakers beliefs, don’t go there!
he can put a sign that says we bake cakes that practice our Christian beliefs and rights or values
Funny how certain characters want “TOLERANCE” yet they show no tolerance except their own SELFISH views. Personally I start to change my views, due to such actions that lack common sense.
Honestly I find it stupid and annoying that this couple tried to sue. The baker was absolutely right, I'm glad he won. However, would they even be able to call it a win if the court had ruled in their favor? I mean, you can't force someone to approve of what you're doing, or to like you, or to accept anything..
So IF they had won, and it forced all bakers and private companies to create cakes or produce products for you against their own free will, morals, and beliefs, are you even sure you would even WANT the service?
I mean.. what if some devious people (not this guy in particular - of course) decided to spit in your cake, compromise, or sabotage your product in some kind of way? You'd never know! I would be terrified honestly..
And although it's illegal to do so, some people are pretty crafty I mean it could be made out to look like a mistake. And this type of thing could happen ALL THE TIME! That's a lose lose situation to me. So you ought to be glad they lost this case just saying..
Wonderful.
Praise the Lord !!!
Take out the variable of religious protection and the even deeper, wider problem is that the consumer, backed by coercive gov, is now forcing businesses to make certain products or provide certain services. Gov regulation of business is presumably about enforcing safe practices, products and services for the public at large regarding those products and services the business owner CHOOSES to make, provide and sell. The regulatory arm of gov quickly becomes heavy-handed and broadly punitive. So that has been a problem in our not-free market for decades.
But this baker offered the customers to buy what he currently sells. They refused and dictated to him what he should make and the fake enforcement group called a “commission” issued its dictates and destroyed this man’s business.
There are so many deviations from American culture, our Const, Nat Law, free enterprise principles in these coercive transformations of business practice. Protecting religious expression is only one. If we permit continued gov coercion and overreach such as these gay wedding cake cases begin to reveal, soon gay wedding cake bakers and many others will also be forced to make what they choose not to provide in their business. We are confusing the public sphere with the private and will destroy all that is private in the process. Guess who wins then?
But doesn't that bakery have the right to refuse service?
Get your Fudge Cake from another Baker. Gay is not a race, gender, sex or creed, therefore it is not discrimination!
The law specifically states, discrimination against, Race, Gender, Sex, Religion and or Creed, no where does the law inlcude who you do, Gay or Straight.
EVEN MY BEAUTIFUL GAY DAUGHTER KNEW
THE GAY COMMUNITY WAS
GOING AFTER CHRISTIAN OWNED BUSINESSES !...
EQUALITY FOR ALL UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAW !🙋🙋🙋🙋
Freedom of religion!!
Trump is going to put two or three more judges for people who believe in the Constitution:-)
chrisj1011 yes! Get rid of these treasonous, thieving, murderous commies!
chrisj1011
💜💜💜MAGA
chrisj1011 And that is the primary reason I voted for him and not Hillary Clinton.
7-2 is not narrow, only a narrow mind would say that and not corrected, two narrow minds
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
Narrow ruling?!!!? . You can't fool everyone. Unanimous ruling! 👏👏👏
except it wasnt?
SHADOSTRYKR UMADBRO?
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
RaymondHng Liberal tears 😢😫😭😭🤧🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸👏👏👏
More like liberal use of emoji as a response instead of actual words because "words hard for you"
What are these two fudge packers going to do now that their 15 minutes of fame are over? They must be really sad.
Now he needs to bring them and state of Colorado to court for money lost only fair .make it a huge sum and teach them a lesson
We have here a gay couple who is trying to be the biggest bullies on the block. Every one hates bullies. especialy when they are trying to be validated by the courts of law.
I agree with the free market comments. I can’t imagine why someone would even eat a cake from a bakery that does not wish to make it. Love is always the secret ingredient, and if it is not added to the recipe, I can’t imagine the finished product would taste very good.
I have no problem with same sex marriage, but no place should ever be forced to do something that goes against their standards.
God bless this man for upholding the truth of the Christian faith.
I wonder if a Muslim baker would be in trouble if he refused to make a cake mfor a gay couple ?
So my understanding is that certain people in this country believe that they have the right to choose whom to buy from, but no-one has the right to choose whom to sell to.
Baker should sue for lost income.
*SUPREME COURT RULES PEOPLE DEMANDING TOLERANCE ARE INTOLERANT*
Maybe I don't understand this situation but I think I would want a baker who got me, my vision and would be completely into creating my dream cake. Sometimes you have to shop around to get the best person for the job.
It was more than what is said here....it talked about exceptions for religious freedom !!!
The argument should be about the fact that forcing someone to do work for someone, no matter what group they say they define themselves by, is called slavery!
This is a great victory for all of us
Excellent, Thank you LORD GOD ALMIGHTY for guiding Our SC,
A Good day for America indeed!!! MAGA💜🌈🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Freedom wins, tyranny takes an L.
Thank God.
cbs, PLEASE EXPLAIN
how a 5-2 ruling, is a
NARROW ruling ?
What the gay couple did was just plain stupid. They drove to Colorado as a way to gain access to more money. And that was even a waste of gas. Public bus companies are government owned. Trash haulers are government owned. But Jack's Cake shop is not.
Personally, I would not want to force someone who obviously doesn't like me to work for me. If a baker won't make a cake for my fiance and I, we would go somewhere else. But I hope this baker is aware that his homophobia is well know and could negatively affect his business.
Glad the Court made the right decision. Anybody know if the baker's business is still doing well?
The baker NEVER refused service to the gay couple, he refused to make a specialty cake. The couple couple have brought any already made product in the shop.
I am amazed that they came up with the correct answer!
Good. If your not Gay. You should NOT have to be forced to deal with the fact that this Immoral behavior is being shoved at you in public and further trying to jeopardize your business. How dare them use there "Gayness" to try and Bully someone . Go find a Gay Baker . The right to refuse service is just what it means.
Oh well, I guess they'll have to get their cake else where... Big Flippin deal
I hoped he would file a counter lawsuit for the damages incurred
AMEN!
Well done , you stood by your beliefs and were villified
Justice is served, delicious as the cakes the Colorado baker can now make unobstructed by the renegade dismal state of Colorado. 7-2..
The judge's opinion is worded in such a way that he points a finger more at the baker for being intolerant so this case is not yet settled. Liberals can't stand to lose.
You need to read again.
This was not a court case on whether you can sale to gays.
It was 100% about forcing someone to enter into a contract that was against their moral views, which is protected by the Constitution whereas there is nothing in the Constitution, nor will ever be, protecting your sexual choice.
The ruling is narrow in scope. It applies only to this baker, not all bakers. It does not strike down Colorado's anti-discrimination law. It does not answer the question of the constitutionality of the baker's refusal. The court only made a ruling on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's application of the states anti-discrimination law. Similar cases with other wedding vendors and other same-sex couples must still go through the court system.
Somewhat true, somewhat misleading.
There was only one question put forth and that was not subject to your opinion of 'other bakers' or even other states.
This was very specifically about one baker and one state and the question was did CO discriminate/abuse the baker and SCOTUS said yes.
And just three days later today, the Arizona Court of Appeals interprets the U.S. Supreme Court’s _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ decision to protect gay couples’ right to equal access in _Brush & Nib Studio v. Phoenix_ . Phoenix passed a measure prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in public accommodations. Alliance Defending Freedom, the same law firm that represented Masterpiece Cakeshop, filed suit against the law on behalf of Brush & Nib Studio, a for-profit business that sells cards and decorations for weddings. The studio argued that the Phoenix law violates its First Amendment right to freedom of speech by prohibiting it from turning away same-sex couples who wish to celebrate their weddings. Citing _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ , the Arizona Court of Appeals unanimously rejected Brush & Nib's claim saying they may oppose same-sex marriage but the court could not create an exception for anti-gay businesses without inflicting grave and continuing harm on gay people. So the _Masterpiece Cakeshop_ decision was used to uphold Phoenix's anti-discrimination law.
I demand a Jewish baker make me a cake shaped like a swastika!
I'm a Christian and I support same-sex marriage. But in this case I also support Masterpiece cakeshop, he is a good person who just simply try his best and peacefully to stick on his religion in God. When we talk about discrimination, no need push too hard and make it become a monster. You will be alright Mr. Jack Phillips, God in your side I'm in your side.
@nellkuo912 There is no such thing as a Christian who supports same-sex marriage. Jesus said he will spit out all lukewarm phony Christians (Rev 3:16). A lukewarm is someone who claims to be Christian but is spiritually uncommitted to God and the teachings of the Bible and the Bible unequivocally condemns same-sex unions. If you don't want to fully commit to the Christian doctrine then you're better off becoming an atheist or pursuing a different faith altogether. God would prefer you either fully commit to him or reject him altogether. There is no middle ground with him, he will send lukewarm phonies like you to an even hotter hell than an atheist.
ya cant force someone to do something they dont want to do...slavery ended 150 years ago
They wouldn’t like it if somebody goes against the freedom of choosing their sexual orientation. Why do they think it’s okay to change his faith and religious believes? Go to a different store for crying out loud.
I’m not a homophobic nor a Christian. I just don’t like the idea of them forcing him to accept what they are! Just leave him alone and move on. The world don’t alway go around your way.
how is this "narrow" 7 to 2 i think CNN needs to go back to school its was a clear cut decision this gay couple just wanted to make a small problem into something much bigger get over yourself your are not above anyone you are just gay that does not make you some type of super human that deserve special treatment for every aspect of your life
What a waste of time and money...let them pack fudge.
So basically the state mishandled the case and that’s why they ruled in bakers favor. Makes sense.
On another note: his baked goods are beautifull. He is so talented! 🍰
Common sense tells me.....use Yelp and find another baker.🙄
...I am sure that was not the only baker. You have rights but so does he. Would I of made the cake yes, but you should not force someone to make you a cake if they do not want to. This is America, the land where you are free to be you and he is free to be him. Let it be. You people are what is wrong with this country and no I don't mean gay people, I mean people that get offended and have to sue people of stupid things like this....It s a waste of the court systems time. You are not fighting the fight for gay people you are just fighting with someone who is standing by his freedom of religion and rights...Get over yourselves seriously...Not worth anyone's time. Go find another baker...
KING JESUS IS LORD ❤🙏🙌 Christians love gays by telling them the truth so they can be save and have eternal life.
Meg Que gay ppl are some of the nicest ppl I ever met love them everyone knows someone who's gay but if we as Christians don't spread the gospel we ourselves will be held accountable on judgement day.
A civilised ruling,here here....at last
Biblical Christians can disobey man when they violate God's word (Acts 5:29)
Thank you for standing up for your religious beliefs.
Let's get one thing clear. He has ZERO issues baking a cake for couples who are on their 2nd or later marriage, a couple who is breaking one of the Top Ten rules, yet suddenly he starts following the Bible as soon as it happens to line up with his own prejudice. God has NOTHING to do with people's views on homosexuality seeing God could personally tell them He has zero problems with it and these people would still hate it all the same.
Michael Allen clearly you haven't read the bible.
How would he know if someone was on their second or later marriage unless they specifically told him which some people would just simply ask for a wedding cake? And even if they were you don’t know the reasoning for their previous divorces as someone could have divorced because of adultery which the Bible says it’s ok to get a divorce under those circumstances or if the person unlawfully divorced before getting saved it would be ok for them to marry again after getting saved because at that point God has deliberately forgotten and washed away their sins
Don't you think if you were so concerned about Biblical morality you might ask???
btw, does God forgive that adulterer EVERY night because I'm pretty sure just because God forgives you it doesn't give you a green card to keep committing it. Or, as it really is, God has NOTHING to do with this because if He did then the same would apply to gay people as it does, with you, when it comes to adultery. It's just classic you guys have ZERO issues with adultery, a sin so severe it made it to the Top Ten list, a sin so severe Christ preached steadfast against it yet all of a sudden you guys want to claim you're so morally concerned when the "sin" just happens to line up with your own hatred.
Uh, doesn't that same Bible list the Ten Commandments? So odd, his must NOT but the one I does. Or do people like you, and him, just blow off the sins you're committing and instead focus on the ones the line up with your own biases? And, yes, he is entitled to his own opinion but he needs to grow a pair of balls and stop blaming God for them when God obviously has nothing to do with it.
Look, I would have ZERO issues with someone claiming religion as their excuse IF that "religion" didn't only appear when it lines up with their own prejudice. As far as I'm concerned, he can refuse service to anyone he deems fit. The problem I have is when people like him want to play the "morally superior" card when it's obvious they aren't playing with even a tenth of the deck.
Disappointed in Sotomayor. Although still glad justice was served
Leviticus 20 :13, gays, Leviticus 20:13, you can't hide
thanks for exposing this!
Whoo hoo! Thank you heavenly father!
Ginsburg and Sotomayor need to be thrown off the court. They can't make any impartial decision.
Bo Rood ..I have to agree. I was a little disappointed to hear that both of their dissents were so forthright in acknowledging only that it’s discriminatory. I don’t think even the staunchest gay rights advocates would agree that recognizing the divinity of a particular religious right as sacred and another one as not sacred is a form of discrimination. I would argue that it’s simply a form of religious observation which everyone is entitled to. He did not refuse service. He simply declined to create one expressive cake that in his opinion was tantamount to condoning and recognizing the divine union of a same-sex couple.
If Hilary was President this poor guy store would of been closed down
Gino Ruggiero frl glad that she devil lost shell burn one day 😂
They dont mean narrow as in the ruling be close. They mean the written decisions from the justices werent very broad and was concise. I'm pretty sure. The person they had on was informative and educational.
Yeah this guy didn't deserve this much ridicule. Good for you, and thank you supreme court!
The slippery slope argument is applicable here. If the actions of the baker were lawful, he or any other baker can also refuse to do so for an interracial couple: alleging interacial marriage is against his/her religion. In fact, any baker or company can exploit religion to refuse to provide services to a particular person without being questioned because religion is being used. Seems as a means to circumvent laws against discrimination
GOD BLESS those people and their business !!!!!!!
we are so praud of them and Jesus praud of you, for you put your religion ahead of your business!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋
THANK YOU JESUS !
🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋
A win for the 1st amendment. Also the Govt needs to keep out of private businesses! Federal and local...
Freedom prevails! Wonderful!
I think any business that does not want to service gay people should have a public sign. I’m not gay but would never give my business to a business that discriminates and would rather not unknowingly give them my business.