Faith

Lesbian Couple May Sue Christian Baker Who Refused to Make Their Wedding Cake

Lesbian Couple May Sue Baker Over Refusal to Make Same Sex Wedding Cake

Victoria Childress, owner of Victoria's Cake Cottage

Victoria Childress, a baker located in Des Moines, Iowa, may be facing legal action after she declined to create a wedding cake for a lesbian couple who were seeking her services. Her decision not to bake for the women, she says, was rooted in her Christian values.

Trina Vodraska and Janelle Sievers claim that they were shocked when they approached Childress, the owner of Victoria’s Cake Cottage, and she declined their business. “It was degrading, you know, it was like she chastised us for wanting to do business with her,” Vodraska said.

While the subject matter was clearly uncomfortable, both parties claim that the original conversation they had was cordial. Childress explained to the women that she was unable to provide the cake due to her faith. She claims that she was very pleasant and that she didn’t speak rudely to them.

“I didn’t do the cake because of my convictions for their lifestyle. It is my right as a business owner,” she explained. “It is my right, and it’s not to discriminate against them. It’s not so much to do with them, as it’s to do with me, and my walk with God and what I will answer (to) him for,” she continued.

But the dialogue between the two parties may end up landing Childress in the courtroom. LifeSiteNews.com has more about the legalities surrounding same-sex marriage in Iowa:

Same-sex “marriage” was legalized in Iowa in 2009 by the state Supreme Court, and a 2007 state civil rights act disallows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in matters of employment, education, housing, and public accommodation.

LezGet Real, a web site that focuses upon issues of interests to lezbians, adds:

The couple released a statement calling Childress a bigot and saying that “Awareness of equality was our only goal in bringing this to light, it is not about cake or someone’s right to refuse service to a customer.”

The Iowa Civil Rights Act was amended in 2007 to include sexual orientation, and the couple have not said if they are willing to file a complaint under that law against the baker. The Iowa Civil Rights Commission has declined to confirm or deny whether they will launch an investigation. The law allows exemptions only for religious institutions, and not for individual businesses.

KCCI-TV has interviews with both parties:

(H/T: LifeSiteNews.com)

Comments (290)

1 2 3 ... 8
  • Bro Geo Too
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:44pm

    `
    Calling all Des Moines area Blazers–please stop in and support this brave entrepreneur. And Blaze, if this does go to court, please keep us informed especially if someone sets up a legal defense fund.

    The lesbian couple is looking for 15 minutes of fame and some quick bucks. Victoria’s Cake Cottage is looking for integrity to scriptural principles, not half-baked surrender to political correctness.

    Report Post »  
    • Quagaar Warrior
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:52pm

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      …a 2007 state civil rights act disallows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in matters of employment, education, housing AND public accommodation. No ORs in the law!
      .
      These lesbos are not being employed by the bakery, educated by the bakery, housed by the bakery or being offered public accommodation by the bakery.
      CASE CLOSED!!!
      DANISH DAMS LOSE!!!
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Report Post »  
    • zippo
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:12pm

      It’s funny how they were shocked the business owner had morals.

      Report Post » zippo  
    • Faith1029
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:21pm

      BRO GEO TOO: “Calling all Des Moines area Blazers–please stop in and support this brave entrepreneur. And Blaze, if this does go to court, please keep us informed especially if someone sets up a legal defense fund.”

      Excellent idea. People who live in her area should go to her business and show their support. If she were in my area, I’d be the first one in the door. A similar situation happened in my state. A business woman held her ground against the liberals not wanting her to support a certain politician so they boycotted her store. It backfired on them and she was flooded with supporting customers. It’s time to take a stand.

      Report Post »  
    • Skippy Toes
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:24pm

      I knew this was coming when they were on channel 8 the other night.

      Report Post » Skippy Toes  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:28pm

      A customer has the right to choose a certain contractor – A contractor has the right to choose a certain customer.

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • Ookspay
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:34pm

      Let them eat muffins…

      Report Post » Ookspay  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:40pm

      Bro Geo………
      Yes, I hope Iowan’s support this lady. It doesn’t appear the two women have a case, but………..

      BEWARE of the DOJ on this one. The DOJ is filled with left-wing extremists, mainly in the civil-rights division and its “voters section” and, to a lesser degree in the DOJ as a whole.
      There is ample evidence of racial discrimination at the DOJ. Remember the NB Panthers at the voting location in Philly?
      Those two thugs got off because of the two divisions of the DOJ I mentioned above. The Panthers got off because they just did not appear at court to testify, along with the complicity of the DOJ’s “voters section” bigots. The case had essentially been won.
      In fact, official DOJ reports show discussions about the NBP case went, ultimately, to AG Eric Holder himself. Holder, if you remember, said (in reference to the NBP case), basically, that it was nothing compared to what had happened to “my people.”

      Allan Lictman (a DOJ voting ‘expert’) was quoted in the NYT as saying “You can try to force [the voting rights act] to be equal, but it’s not………This is from J Christian Adams book..‘Injustice’.

      This is today’s DOJ, so I would not assume this business lady from Iowa is in the clear just yet.

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:09pm

      If someone would not sell me a product because I am a christian I would go elsewhere. These witches want money and cause trouble. That is all. Why do they want to buy from someone that refuses.their money? All about pushing their agenda and bullying

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • neverending
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:29pm

      Yes indeed please do. We need to step forward and show our support to people like her whenever we can. Thank you so much for the post.

      Report Post »  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 9:12am

      That stupid law is going to shade this issue. Iowa is so liberal that it is not a certainty that she will win.

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • The Sergeant Major
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 12:26pm

      “not half-baked surrender to political correctness” HALF-BAKED your killing me!

      Report Post » The Sergeant Major  
    • Pacman116
      Posted on February 23, 2012 at 6:17am

      I’m in.

      Report Post » Pacman116  
  • KickinBack
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:40pm

    Oooh, Oooh…Let me guess. “Mental and emotional distress due to unheralded bigotry”

    Report Post » KickinBack  
    • Grey Eagle
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:46pm

      A business can decline to provide service. This couple should just find another baker.

      Report Post »  
    • ACLUHater
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:52pm

      So the dykes couldn’t just go somewhere else? Sure – but that wouldn’t garner the popular gay attention that dominates the news these days.

      Report Post »  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:19pm

      I have decline to provide service just because I thought the person was a jerk. Do jerks have rights?

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
  • Smokey_Bojangles
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:39pm

    I am for Gay Rights,but I am more for Business’s rights. A Business should not HAVE to serve Smokers,Fat People,Non-English Speakers,Gays,Lesbians,Short People,Tall People,White People,or can Be so exclusive that No one can be a client. It is up to the owner who’s money is green enough. If I Do Not like it I do not use that Business. I is not up to the government. heck! I Wish I could find a Restaurant that catered to fat,smoking,meat eating,gun toting Red necks.

    Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
    • sWampy
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:51pm

      I hate people who say I’m pro-choice and I’m for gay rights. Pro choice says you are for murder because some slut couldn’t keep her panties on, drank while taking the pill, forgot to take the pill, or was just stupid and changed her mind. When you say you are for for gay rights, at best you are saying you are for 2 mentally ill people being allowed to abuse each other, otherwise if they want to reproduce, they do this by abusing kids. It is amazing the evil liberals get useless idiots to profess they are for, and against everything that millions of years life on this planet has woven into our instincts to know is wrong even when we aren‘t taught it’s wrong.

      Report Post »  
    • Doctor Nordo
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:04pm

      @SWAMPY

      It’s only abuse if there is no consent.

      Report Post » Doctor Nordo  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:09pm

      Swampy, you are a troglodyte.

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • Aerofanadam
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:20pm

      I don’t agree with “Gay” rights. I draw the line at human rights. No one human has greater rights than another. No one human can have the right to force anyone to do anything, but we all have the right to attempt persuasion. These women attempted to persuade the baker, the baker said no, neither party has the right to force the other to change. Also, in regard to a restaurant that caters to fat, carnivorous, gun toting, redneck smokers, it’s caller *******-barrel. Not to mention the mom and pop joints that still exist in small Texas towns. I highly recommend GGs in Marion, Texas if you’re ever in the neighborhood and dying for some down home, chicken fried, smothered and covered. Good food made by local family that’s been in the restaurant biz for several generations.

      Report Post » Aerofanadam  
    • sisserydoo
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:31pm

      ******* Barrel…..Hahaha, that’s great!

      Report Post » sisserydoo  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 5:30am

      Aerofanadam: “I highly recommend GGs in Marion, Texas”

      I join that recommendation. Was there only once while passing through, but it’s memorable.

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
    • Melvin Spittle
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 11:49am

      @Doctor Nordo

      “@SWAMPY

      It’s only abuse if there is no consent.”

      Wrong. If a child consents to sex is the child not abused?

      The LGBTQ-(This space reserved for a future protected perversion letter)- agenda has perverted God’s law in my opinion. As a Christian, I believe it to be wrong for LGBTQ-(This space reserved for a future protected perversion letter)-partners to raise children that have no voice in the matter. They and their enabling supporters may get there way in this life, but will face God’s judgement ultimately. Wonder how that conversation will go:

      “But God, you can’t blame me for interpreting your word to accomodate my lifestyle choice!”

      Melvin Spittle  
  • GTH
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:38pm

    And so it begins

    Report Post »  
  • WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges04
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:38pm

    Lesbians? What have we heard about them … hmm? Oh yeah:

    26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
    27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
    29 being filled with all unrighteousness, £sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
    30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, £unforgiving, unmerciful;
    32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
    -Romans 1

    Report Post » WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges04  
    • The Top Crusader
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 11:07am

      So… sinners can’t buy cakes?

      I wonder if she also refuses wedding cakes to couples that live together before marriage or have children out of wedlock.

      Report Post » The Top Crusader  
    • Ivey123
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 10:47pm

      @ TheTop Crusader………The baker would of partaken in the celebration of an immoral union. That is her conviction. Not the same as to what you are implyng. I applaud her for standing up for her morals and God given sense of right and wrong. I won’t be part of any homosexual wedding in any way shape or form.

      Report Post »  
  • The Third Archon
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:36pm

    “It is my right,”
    Well that’s what you are asserting
    “and it’s not to discriminate against them.”
    Well maybe that’s not your explicit purpose per se, but it does seem to be an indivisible consequence by your own admission.
    “It’s not so much to do with them,”
    Oh, well at least it’s not personal.
    “as it’s to do with me,”
    You can say THAT again.
    “and my walk with God”
    you THINK…
    “and what I will answer (to) him”
    …again, what you THINK you will answer to him.

    Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • Quagaar Warrior
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:43pm

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      …a 2007 state civil rights act disallows discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in matters of employment, education, housing AND public accommodation. No ORs in the law!
      .
      These lesbos are not being employed by the bakery, educated by the bakery, housed by the bakery or being offered public accommodation by the bakery.
      CASE CLOSED!!!
      DIKES LOSE!!!
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Report Post »  
    • gobnait
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:44pm

      Who are you to judge this person? Both parties stated that their initial interaction was cordial. If this woman politely and respectfully declined, the matter should have ended there. Everyone is entitled to live by their conscience within the confines of the law and that includes people who don’t share your views .Tolerance is for EVERYONE.

      Report Post »  
    • hucksqr
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:50pm

      What makes her beliefs any less valid than the lesbians? This is her PRIVATE PROPERTY! It is her private business, she can refuse service to anyone she likes. She has every right to refuse to associate with someone based on her religious convictions if she feels it violates her morals. She didn’t ask them to come into her shop, they chose to enter it. Now, I’m a firm believer that the government has no more right to tell a person who they can be married to as they do to tell me what I can put in my body, or what type of health insurance I have. There is simply nothing in the Constitution giving it that power. It also does not have the right to force someone into associations they deem to be against their moral code. If respecting your “rights” clearly violates the Natural Rights of another, then you truly did not have a right, you just wish to be a selfish tyrant

      Report Post »  
    • dsind
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:04pm

      tird acorn’
      all business’s reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.
      I KNOW!

      Report Post »  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:08pm

      “Public Accommodations

      Q. What are public accommodations?
      A. A public accommodation is a private entity that owns, operates, leases, or leases to, a place of public accommodation. Places of public accommodation include a wide range of entities, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, doctors’ offices, pharmacies, retail stores, museums, libraries, parks, private schools, and day care centers. Private clubs and religious organizations are exempt from the ADA’s title III requirements for public accommodations.”

      http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/adaqa2.html
      Just one example of the way in which federal law has defined “public accommodation” but as you can see, in very similar ‘Civil Rights’ (granted disability status versus sexual orientation) legislation, a definition of “public accommodation” very probably encompassing this type of business is used.

      Arguably, this business is a public accommodation, which might potentially make it run afoul of the cited law against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

      Whether or not the actions of the cake maker run afoul of a legal statute is, of course, independent of whether or not her claims are morally valid. I find no evidence presented to find her moral claims of culpability on the basis of sexual orientation to be anything other than groundless.

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • liljoe62
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:20pm

      Just because YOU dont believe in GOD, DOESNT give you the right to tell others they cant! Be as proud as you will in your DISbelief, but DONT stop those to proclaim theirs!

      Report Post »  
    • TheVoice1
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:29pm

      Tird Acorn
      “Arguably, this business is a public accommodation, which might potentially make it run afoul of the cited law against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”
      ______
      She owns her own private business Acorn head, so plea your liberal mud pie case elsewhere… discrimination… give me a break… what a dip…. a privately own business doesn’t have to serve anyone they choose not to… go lobby somewhere else…

      Stand Strong America

      PS this should really intensify her business… probably will need to expand

      Report Post » TheVoice1  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:50pm

      I cited an example of existing case law, civil rights legislation no less, that uses a definition of “public accommodation” that INCLUDES private entities you troglodyte–if you were actually engaging in arguing the points at issue rather than knee-jerk reactionism you would know at least this, and would address it.

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • COFemale
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 11:49pm

      Public accommodation deals with handicap people; they must provide elevators, wheelchair ramps, etc. It has nothing to do with her type of business. Now if you are saying being gay is a handicap, then you may be on the right track. However, since gayness isn’t a handicap, but a sexual preference, then this woman is well within her rights to decline making a cake for them.

      Report Post » COFemale  
    • 4theRepublic
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 8:39am

      we walk by faith and not by sight… It is NOT what she thinks, it is what she believes!

      She didn’t kick them out or deny them to enter her business. She talked with them and was cordial about it. She just turned their business away. As a business owner, that is still her right.

      Report Post » 4theRepublic  
  • Rajabear1
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:36pm

    If a church can refuse to marry same sex couples because it goes directly against their faith, then why not a private business owner? Nudge, nudge. Push, push. Shove, shove.

    Report Post »  
    • Smokey_Bojangles
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:41pm

      Push Push Shove shove enough and Churches will be charged with hate crimes.

      Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
    • WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges04
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:42pm

      “marry” + “same sex” = oxymoron
      ;)

      Report Post » WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges04  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:08pm

      The fact that we are even having this discussion infuriates me.

      Lets see…..we cannot post the Ten Commandments, as it may offend someone, cannot place the flag in certain locations for fear of being “offensive”, but have to serve people who are offensive to us.

      Why would anyone have to make anything for anybody if they don’t like them? What difference does it make, other than that the merchant loses a customer? People will have other places to do business. Maybe lesbians will then start their own bakeries, or they could have a lesbian friend bake it.

      If some pimply-faced 17 y/o comes to my motorcycle shop (theoretically, as I was only a salesman at one) and wants a 160 HP bike, has no rider experience, has taken no rider safety course, and only asks “how fast does it go”, then I could conclude that kid should not have that bike. You could kill some innocent person. So, ok…I lose a customer. So what? My perogative! I figure I just did that kid a favor. Go somewhere else, or buy a used one from someone. I don’t really care. Tell your friends not to buy a bike from me. I don’t really care.
      That is real freedom!

      Good night!

      Report Post »  
    • vtxphantom
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:28pm

      No shoes, no shirt, no morals, no service.

      Report Post »  
  • Free2speakRN
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:35pm

    Something rings here about, “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”

    Nobody can have ‘everything.

    Report Post »  
    • chips1
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:43pm

      She should have at least offered to make them a hair pie!!!

      Report Post »  
    • Red Max
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:08pm

      Nah, hair pies are too good for them; KlonDIKE bars would have been better.

      Report Post »  
    • Mimi24
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:00pm

      Chips1 I’m not even going to say it, hair pie. When I quit laughing I’ll think of something.

      Report Post »  
  • DogTags
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:32pm

    The demonic spirit of homosexuality is not tolerant of the Truth of the Word of God. It will set itself against anyone who holds fast to the what is True. Christians should not let this woman face the irrational consequences of standing for her faith in a secular humanist world.

    Report Post »  
  • jzs
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:32pm

    Homosexuals aren’t a “protected group.” If they were refused because they were black, or old, or Buddists, they might have a case.

    I’m a liberal, but guys, just go get your f-ing cake somewhere else.

    Report Post » jzs  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 8:45am

      Agreed and if you’re really P.O.’d, organize a gay boycott of the business. That would make both sides happy.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • SoupSandwich
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 10:28am

      Very libertarian of you. Hope yet.

      Report Post »  
  • Average_JoeMN
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:32pm

    Homosexuals are the new fascist totalitarians, intolerant of the religious views of anyone who disagrees with them. Disagree and you don’t just hold a different view, you’re a “bigot”. They are irrational and hateful toward others.

    Report Post »  
    • SoupSandwich
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:52pm

      Seen that a lot-to the point they get militant if you disagree on any level. Can we still say butch? Those hags will shank you if you cross them-that poor baker lady needs to watch out for the ***** mafia now. Where is Rosy an Ellen when you need them.

      Al J- there are hordes/myriad of people that make a killer living already, bogging down the system with frivolous crap. Half of the lawyers guild in NY-follow the crows and buzzards afterwards and they will already be there.

      Report Post »  
  • Virginia Rebel
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:31pm

    Listen up, states that don’t yet have “gay marriage.” This is what happens when you get it. Fight it with everything you can.

    Report Post »  
  • ProudTeaPartyMember
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:30pm

    It’s a private store, a private company, “Get the hell out of my business you lesbian creeps”.

    Report Post » ProudTeaPartyMember  
  • eramthgin
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:29pm

    Go ahead and sue. There will be dozens of attorneys that will take the case pro bono. It is a shame that Iowa is not a loser pays state. The lesbians haven’t got anything to stand on.

    Report Post » eramthgin  
  • Quagaar Warrior
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:29pm

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    There’s nothing in our constitution that gives anyone the right to NOT be offended!
    Go get a cake somewhere else.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Report Post »  
  • Drakkhanlord
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:28pm

    business reserves the right to serve whom they wish…

    all lawyers need to be made extinct…

    btw this censorship is BS…

    Report Post » Drakkhanlord  
  • kbstreet1
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:26pm

    When did businesses lose the right to refuse service?

    Report Post » kbstreet1  
  • mikenleeds
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:26pm

    make your own cake you nasty lezbo

    Report Post » mikenleeds  
  • COFemale
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:25pm

    I am sorry it is her business she can refuse service to anyone she wishes. I am sure this is not the only bake shop in town. If they do sue, then shame on them.

    Report Post » COFemale  
    • CatB
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:33pm

      I agree .. I bet they were “shopping” around to find someone to refuse . and then sue them …. go to another bakery.

      Report Post »  
  • TimeForReason
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    In Sodom and Gommorah, the homosexuals became so violent and proud of their sin. That is happening today. Only a few decades ago, anyone who sinned would hide in shame. Now sin is defended as a right and something to be proud of. Disgusting.

    Report Post »  
  • liinsivi
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    She owns a PRIVATE business. She has the choice to serve a customer or not. There are other cake makers, she is losing business by her decision but it is HER decision.

    Report Post »  
    • hgaut
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:46pm

      THANK YOU! It’s her business and no one should go after her for not providing a service because of her convictions. The article stated that she wasn’t rude so these women need to get over it. I don‘t think Christian doctors should be forced to do abortions either but that’s another matter.

      Report Post » hgaut  
    • bloptop
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:57pm

      Actually, because of the civil rights act of 1964 a business cannot refuse service to anyone based on their race. In my opinion, no business should be able to refuse service to anyone based on sexual orientation either.

      Report Post » bloptop  
    • Mimi24
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:06pm

      @Bloptop would you eat a cake or anything else that was made for you by someone that was forced to make it? I wouldn’t. Best idea would be to find someone that is supportive of their situation and move on.

      Report Post »  
    • 4theRepublic
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 8:57am

      @MIMI24… Well said!!

      @bloptop… so as a business owner she has no rights? If she is willing to suffer the loss of this customer and possibly more due to her action then so be it! You, her Neighbors NOR the Government has any rights to FORCE her to do what she doesn’t want to do. She has the right to refuse their money as much as they have a right to go else where.

      Report Post » 4theRepublic  
  • C. Schwehr
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    I’ve got an answer…MOVE OUT OF IOWA!

    Report Post »  
  • The10thAmendment
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    Boohoo. A Christian doesn’t want to bake a cake for queers.

    Hey *****. Grow a set, or are you having a set surgically implanted?

    Report Post » The10thAmendment  
  • 1stAmendment
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    The great flood came because of this , soddom was over turned because of gay tolerant place, same sex has no valid place in “One Nation Under God”!

    Report Post »  
    • snufy
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 9:21pm

      To correct your statement, the Great Flood was because of the nephilm created of fallen angels and human women. Soddom and Gomors were destroyed by fire.

      Report Post » snufy  
    • GetWisdom
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 7:31am

      Actually Nephilim were not Angle/people hybrids. Hebrews 1:5 “For to which of the angels said he [God] at anytime, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee?” According to this verse God has never called Angels Sons. Therefore the sons of God in Genesis 6:2 (the Nephilim reference) are not Angels. Biblically sons of God are believers 1John 3:1.

      Report Post » GetWisdom  
    • The Top Crusader
      Posted on November 18, 2011 at 11:15am

      Nah, pretty sure the Nephelim were angels, plenty of scripture and history backs it up.

      Beside the point, though.

      She shouldn‘t be forced to provide service if she doesn’t want to, sure. But the hate on the Blaze really makes me sick. I‘m tired of trying to explain that conservatives aren’t at all the stereotype liberals think they are, but then I look at comments on the Blaze and realize I’m wrong apparently.

      Report Post » The Top Crusader  
  • Al J Zira
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 8:24pm

    Pure nonsense and hopefully get’s thrown out of court. It’s frivolous with no foundation. If this is allowed to proceed the precedence is set for me to go to any business that doesn‘t agree with my beliefs and then sue when I’m refused service. I can target business and make a living out of suing.

    Report Post » Al J Zira  
    • PA-FuBo
      Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:30pm

      Al-J, that’s their long term goal…..

      Report Post »  
  • Mimi24
    Posted on November 17, 2011 at 10:23pm

    I think you need to grow up and look in a mirror. We are all individuals. We have our own individual beliefs. Who said hate was part of it? Even the alleged offended parties said she was cordial to them.

    Report Post »  
  • Azzman
    Posted on November 18, 2011 at 12:58pm

    I have four children and My wife and I are passing along what you call hate and bigotry, and guess what? There is nothing you can do about it. There are no laws that you can pass to fix my what you call hate. I am now going to go purchase a cake from Victoria with crucifix on it.

    Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 8

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love