Emails Raise Questions of Bias in Case Against Bakers Who Denied Service for Same-Sex Wedding

dailysignal.com ^ | june 1, 2015 | kelsey harkness

[lowbridge]

The Daily Signal has exclusively learned that the government agency responsible for enforcing Oregon’s anti-discrimination law appears to be working closely with a powerful gay rights advocacy group in its case against Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

Communications between the agency, theOregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, and the LGBT organization, Basic Rights Oregon, raise questions about potential bias in the state’s decision to charge the Kleins with discrimination for refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.

In April, a judge for the agency recommended the Kleins be fined $135,000.

Communications obtained through a public records request show employees of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries—which pursued the case against the Kleins—participating in phone calls, texting, and attending meetings with Basic Rights Oregon, the largest LGBT advocacy group in the state.

[Travis McGee]

[NCjim]

Bias? Surely you jest!

[Lee Enfield]

Having read the Constitution and Bill of Rights I distinctly remember something about “Free Exercise” of religion, nothing about “Free Exercise” of private parts. Yet the naughty bits seem to be more important?

[Drango]

I’m shocked.

[miss marmelstein]

The libs were no fools: attacking and sidelining religion and its strong connection to the Constitution was one great way of destroying the country.

I just hope the gays (those highly literate folks who love to read deeply into history) know what's coming once the fascists/commies/islamists take over. They tend not to like sexual licentiousness. (How can you control and kill so many people when they are having so much degenerate fun?)

[fwdude]

I am absolutely convinced that there is ALWAYS collusion between governments and the Gaystapo groups in these cases.

During California’s Prop 8 circus trials, there was a steady stream of communications between the White House and the courts, as well as homo-activist organizations. It couldn’t have been a more corrupt outcome.

[TYVets]

The EPA has done similar things with Environment Groups

[Pollster1]

This is a battle between good and pure evil. So far, evil is winning.

[savagesusie]

You also read about JUSTICE which is the Queen of Virtue-—and to force Vice in a “Justice System” onto people and onto children (pride in anal sex days) and irrational dysfunctional behaviors-—is promoting VICE and ejecting REASON from Just Law which is UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws-—should be Null and Void in a REASONED government.

All judges who throw out Right Reason and Justice (Virtue) from our legal system to promote Stalin’s Constitution need to be impeached.

When Law ceases to be Just, it ceases to be Law.

Promoting abortion (PP) and anal sex in our schools is why we have children who graduate as idiots——they have had Christian Ethics (Founding Ethics) flipped-—into Satanic, pagan (Afghani harem boy) Ethics. It is unconstitutional-—since our Constitution is based on Natural Laws and God’s Laws.

[Lee Enfield]

I agree with all you say. My purpose was to address a simplification of the legal arguments that I never hear, plus add a bit of humor.

[Amendment10]

"Yet the naughty bits seem to be more important? "

As a matter of fact, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (14A), which nobody seems to know about anymore, prohibits the states from making laws / policies which unreasonably abridge constitutionally enumerated rights. And pro-gay, PC interpretations of 14A's Equal Protections Clause aside, since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay “rights” like gay marriage, the states in question violated Section 1, imo, by using constitutionally unprotected gay “rights” to trump 1st Amendment freedom of religious expression.

[Talisker]

As a matter of fact, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (14A), which nobody seems to know about anymore, prohibits the states from making laws / policies which unreasonably abridge constitutionally enumerated rights. And pro-gay, PC interpretations of 14A's Equal Protections Clause aside, since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay “rights” like gay marriage, the states in question violated Section 1, imo, by using constitutionally unprotected gay “rights” to trump 1st Amendment freedom of religious expression.

If you're referring to: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;" then I'm afraid it doesn't apply to "constitutionally enumerated rights." In fact, it doesn't apply to rights at all, but only, as it expressly says, "privileges or immunities." In addition, it's not even talking about "the (American) People" who have God-given rights, but only "citizens of the United States" who are accorded those "privileges or immunities" by that government.

And that's the mechanism - our we are all being held under administrative, corproate laws of PRIVILEGES. You cannot even bring up the term "rights" in a Court - you will be held as out of order for lack of standing.

Everything is being done by the Left as an adjustment of specified privileges - all of it. That's where the fight is, but no one is there to fight. They don't even know the subject exists.

We have not, in fact, lost any rights at all. They're just not being used - and no one cares to find out how.

[Amendment10]

"If you're referring to: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;" then I'm afraid it doesn't apply to "constitutionally enumerated rights.""

With all due respect Talisker, your assertion that the “privileges and immunities" indicated in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (14A) don’t apply to constitutionally enumerated rights is incorrect. This is because the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of 14A, had clearly indicated the first eight amendments to the Constitution as examples of constitutional privileges and immunities that 14A applies to the states.

"Mr. Speaker, that the scope and meaning of the limitations imposed by the first section, fourteenth amendment of the Constitution may be more fully understood, permit me to say that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as contradistinguished from citizens of a State, are chiefly [emphasis added] defined in the first eight amendments to the Constitution of the United States." — John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe (See middle column.)

[Lee Enfield]

Y’all seem to be getting my point.

[Amendment10]

"Y’all seem to be getting my point."

You stated that you read the Constitution and that gives you an unfair advantage. /sarc

[Lee Enfield]

Sorry, when I went to school we learned to read, and I’m ancient.

[Talisker]

"...the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as contradistinguished from citizens of a State..."

"Citizens of a State" are "We the People."

con·tra·dis·tin·guish
\-ˈtiŋ-gwish\
transitive verb
:to distinguish by contrasting qualities

con·trast
\kən-ˈtrast, ˈkän-ˌ\
verb
: to be different especially in a way that is very obvious
: to compare (two people or things) to show how they are different

[Jack Black]

The Oregon State constitution has been amended to protect gay rights, according to the article.

[Amendment10]

"The Oregon State constitution has been amended to protect gay rights, according to the article."

I don’t know what the Oregon constitution says about same-sex marriage. But it remains that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment prohibits the states from making laws which abridge the constitutionally enumerated rights of citizens.

And since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay marriage, Oregon is wrongly using constitutionally unprotected gay marriage “rights” to trump constitutionally enumerated rights, the 1st Amendment protected rights of religious expression in this example.