LGBT News Oregon bakery pays 144,000 in damages

Nah, they'll just continue revelling in being "persecuted" instead.

 

I don't think money is the answer, I think they should be made to make a really nice cake, free of charge, to that couple and then be made to read the part(s) of the Bible that mention that God loves everyone. [I know 'made' seems like force ... but I think it could really help people who missed that part of the Bible].

 

People still seem to think the monetary damages are coming solely from the owner's denial of service to this lesbian couple. The business owners doc-dropped this couple's information (including their address!) during the court proceedings, leading to numerous threats being made against the couple and their foster children who were then in danger of being taken away by the state. These people should be glad they weren't charged criminally in this case for trying to ruin this couple's life and violating their right to privacy and safety.

 

They are not a private business. They are a public business who is supposed to serve all the public. It would be a huge mess if business owners were allowed to discriminate on any basis and also why serving the public should mean serving the public.

 

I hadn't heard this. That's outrageous! $144k is not nearly enough to compensate the family for the stress, pain and suffering they had to endure in this case. The business owners seem to not be just self-righteous religious bigots, but real human assholes, too.

 

It's a tiny sum of money, but at least we can say that a civil penalty has been imposed.

My only problem is that $144,000 might not be enough to cover the plaintiffs' legal expenses (I saw nothing about the bakery paying for legal costs) and that the bakers made over $500,000 through crowdfunding, so they still turned a profit on this incident.

 

If only we had some clones of you in governments world wide

 

You'd be surprised. Judges will do these sorts of things if they feel it is a just punishment and will send enough of a message. And people usually like to stay out of having to pay big fines and go to jail.

 

Thats good

 

Don't worry. We're not all like this in Oregon.

 

I still fail to understand why anyone would want to give a homophobic store like that any business.

 

I don't know how I feel about stories like this anymore. My non confrontational nature is saying it would be the easiest thing ever to avoid a business run by homophobic dicks given the extremely high amount of perfectly non-homophobic alternatives you should have to chose from. Nobody is forcing you to buy your cakes at that particular establishment and you are entirely free to spend your money elsewhere. I feel like whenever you see a story like this it's probably someone causing a ruckus for attention or to see if they cant make a quick buck. Im thinking back to that story with the transwoman arguing with the airport security who kept misgendering her, eventually causing her to miss her flight. I immediately got the impression from her twitters she was tweeting every 5 seconds that she had a very confrontational and annoying personality and I wouldn't be surprised at all if she had instigated the whole conflict. Now I'm not saying that's what this lesbian couple is doing because they could be wonderful people who are nothing like that for all I know, only that when there are obviously people out there who are taking advantage of the movement for their own personal gain, that it makes me desensitized and jaded to where I am always thinking twice before pouring all of my support and empathy onto the poor, helpless LGBT discrimination victims, especially when they already have that $144,000 to console their hurt feelings.

On the other hand, it goes without saying that I have nothing for contempt for those spineless bullies, cowering behind their bibles whenever someone calls them out on their bullshit. I've just seem the same story painted the same way too many times now and I know the world isn't that simple. I don't know how I feel about stories like this anymore..

 

I don't know about you, but I don't go to a baker or a hairdresser because of their social values; I purchase their services or goods because I think they're worth my money. That is the extent of the commercial relationship. For an irrelevant factor such as sexuality to deprive me of access to a good or service which I can pay for is unacceptable, but I'm not going to go a markedly inferior or unaffordable alternative because I prefer the owners socially.

 

Well, it probably won't pay for everything they've done, but at least something is being done I guess. I feel the penalty should really be something that would teach a lesson though, like making them pay for all the damages by handing over every last bit of that crowdfunding cash they didn't deserve to get in the first place.

 

It may be unacceptable, but I don't understand why anyone would want to force the business owners to give them business if their values are indeed homophobic. It's the exact opposite of a boycott but for the same reason. Maybe it's just my own preference on this case, but If I walked into a bakery and they told me they will not cater a gay wedding, my initial reaction would be to walk right out and let everyone I know what an awful business it is.

I will give my 2 cents on the issue, though. I think there's the issue of whether or not a private business has the right to discriminate. I think given US laws, there's really no strong legal standing against a private business using their "religious beliefs" as an excuse for discrimination. Is it mandatory for a business to provide the same services for everyone regardless of the circumstances? If so, are there any exceptions? It's a tricky issue when you think about religious freedom vs discrimination. Should a photographer be forced to photograph a gay wedding if they really really don't want to? It seems like they shouldn't have to, because that involves them being part of something that their religion is against. Should a restaurant allow a gay couple to walk inside? It seems like there's no real religious justification for this, so it's definitely discrimination if they are denied access.

That said, I don't want to focus too much on the legality of this, because there's no real easy answer to it. It would indeed piss me off if the social views of the owner were against everything I believe in, but why would I want to force them to go against their own religious convictions for the sake of me getting what I want? Maybe they're wrong, but why would someone want to go through that type of trouble?

 

*almost made a wizard of oz joke*
*slapped self*

 

In the United States, private businesses that are open to the public are barred from discriminating based on certain protected classes of people. Some states have explicitly added sexual orientation to the protected classes of people, while others have interpreted existing laws as barring discrimination based on sexual orientation, while yet others have specifically passed laws that make it OK to discriminated based on one's "sincerely held religious beliefs" and even gone so far as to try and nullify anti-discrimination laws passed by city governments (Arkansas is one, though honestly, I'm not exactly sure where we stand at this point with it).

While I agree that I'd generally prefer not to give my money to a business that wants to be able to discriminate against me....I also see the value in anti-discrimination laws.

When it was legal to openly discriminate based on race, it wasn't just the bigots who did so, it was the business owners who feared that their white customers wouldn't give them their business if they didn't go along to get along. There was also a level of intimidation and threats to person and property. That's the problem when you allow a majority group to pass laws that restrict the rights of a minority group. They have numbers on their side, so while it sounds good on paper to say, "private businesses should be able to discriminate however they want," in practice it just doesn't work out so well.

In some places we have enough straight allies that businesses will want to avoid discriminatory practices to avoid losing the business of those allies, but in some parts of the country, that's just not the case.