Posted on 02/09/2018 9:06:21 AM PST by SeekAndFind
BAKERSFIELD, California – It would be a violation of free speech for a Christian baker to be forced to make a same-sex "wedding" cake, a California judge ruled on Monday.
Cathy Miller owns Tastries Bakery, where 40 percent of her business is wedding cakes, many of which she personally designs. Last August two lesbians asked her to design a special cake to celebrate their “marriage,” and Miller politely redirected them to an accommodating competitor.
Nevertheless, as is the well-established LGBT pattern, the lesbians sued Miller anyway. They filed a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing, accusing Miller of violating California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which criminalizes denying service based on sexual orientation. Oral arguments were heard Friday.
Judge Lampe said that to force a Christian to create a cake that celebrates something against their religion is "violence."
“The State is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The State asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids,” Judge Lampe’s ruling reads. “For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech.”
The judge issued his ruling Monday, stating it would only be discrimination if Miller refused to sell an existing product to the lesbians. He discerned that forcing a business owner to violate his/her beliefs is “the stuff of tyranny.”
“Cathy will gladly serve anyone, including same-sex couples,” Charles LiMandri of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund explained to the court. “But Cathy will not use her artistic talents to express messages that conflict with her sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage.”
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
>
“The judge issued his ruling Monday, stating it would only be discrimination if Miller refused to sell an existing product to the lesbians. “
Qualifying a refusal to sell as “discrimination” is in itself already tyranny. It let the Pandora box wide open to the grievance industry. If such nonsense was kept away from the law to start with, we will not have all the ensuing stupid litigation.
>
TY, and spot on.
Baker was spared but the court didn’t swat down the stupid State trampling upon Rights...as usual.
>
Whoa, where did this judge come from?
Common sense and correct rulings are not something we are used to seeing.
>
Don’t go getting TOO excited, the status quo will return sh....Oh, there it is
"Stop harassing Christian Baker(s.)"
Fixed it. :-)
Does a private service have the right to deny service for whatever reason? I honestly don’t understand where the lines are anymore.
One aspect of my job is to prepare homes for sale, but we will not take on a customer in a severe hoarding situation. We don’t have the training, safety equipment or resources to deal with such. So can a hoarder turn around and sue us or force us to clear their home, citing discrimination of someone with a mental disability?
There are other people who would gladly make these two a cake. Why do they go so rabidly after somebody who told them no? I think I know the answer. It is because of the arrogance that homosexuals exhibit all the time. That arrogance is what keeps them in that perverse lifestyle. They refuse to examine any other life view than their own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.