State silences bakers who refused to make cake for lesbian couple, fines them $135k

http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/02/state-silences-bakers-who-refused-to-make-cake-for-lesbian-couple-fines-them-135k/

[quote]In the ruling, Avakian placed an effective gag order on the Kleins, ordering them to “cease and desist” from speaking publicly about not wanting to bake cakes for same-sex weddings based on their Christian beliefs.

“This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” the Kleins, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, which has since closed, wrote on their Facebook page. “According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech.”[/quote]

Political correctness on YouTube; Dixie is now labeled as:

"The following content has been identified by the YouTube community as being potentially offensive or graphic. Viewer discretion is advised."

https://www.youtube.com/verify_controversy?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DXNID02byVV4

So the asshats think they are winning by censoring others.

Makes me want to go out and buy a Stars and Bars and play Dixie from a boom-box as loud as I can; even though I'm a Yankee born and raised.

Well, Amy brought this up in a thread, regarding the Kleins in Oregon. In the state of Oregon, gays are a protected class, and as such, you can no more refuse service to someone based on their sexuality than you can on their race.

And forgive me for being blunt, but the Kleins are stupid. If you're going to own a business, it would seem to me that you need to be up on the laws regarding discrimination. And just who is a protected class in your state. Seriously, they should have known better. This is not some obscure blue law that hasn't been applied since the Pilgrims landed. It seems that if homosexuals suddenly gained protected status in your state, that would be pretty much common knowledge.

What did they think was going to happen to them?

As for stripping all your First Amendment rights away, hyperbole is not helping your cause. First, they were only told that they couldn't talk about one certain thing. Everything else, they're still free to discuss. To say nothing of the fact that freedom of religion and freedom of the press still applies to them.

But I came to this thread to share a link, so here it is: WatchMojo's top ten picks for the worst songs.

You ask me, their list is much to biased toward current popular selections. Certain songs, such as Barry Manilow's "Copacabana," have lasting badness that endures from generation to generation.

Though I must admit, I certainly agreed with their choice regarding that horrible Nicki Minaj song. It's not just stupid. It's annoyingly stupid.

As for stripping all your First Amendment rights away, hyperbole is not helping your cause. First, they were only told that they couldn't talk about one certain thing. Everything else, they're still free to discuss.

Though I didn't read the Daily Signal story, I'd like to think there's some compelling legal reason why the Kleins aren't allowed to discuss their case publicly. However, outside of that, First Amendment rights are kind of binary; either you have them or you don't. And if you favor limiting someone else's, you've also advocated limiting them for yourself, for whatever arbitrary reason.

People get ready, there's a train a-comin'

And guess who's driving it and where it's headed?

That's right. After repeatedly screwing consumers before, during, and after Obamacare, the insurance companies are raising rates 23-54% next year because "young people aren't signing up" and the new users are "sicker than expected".

Fortunately, Obama is confident the insurance commissioners will do their jobs.

Just like last time?

If King George III were running for president today, he'd be the low tax candidate.

Old RPM Daddy: Though I didn't read the Daily Signal story, I'd like to think there's some compelling legal reason why the Kleins aren't allowed to discuss their case publicly. However, outside of that, First Amendment rights are kind of binary; either you have them or you don't. And if you favor limiting someone else's, you've also advocated limiting them for yourself, for whatever arbitrary reason.

I'm not sure what motivated the law to impose a gag order on the Kleins.

But as I pointed out elsewhere, prohibiting certain practices is not denying you freedom of religion. We've been doing it since the beginning. That's why Mormons and Muslims can't take multiple wives. Their religion might allow it, even command it, but the law prohibits it. Hence Mormons and Muslims are denied their religious observance of polygamy. Rastafarians are not excluded from laws that make marijuana illegal, even though they may believe that pot enhances their spirituality.

Same thing with Oregon. Your religion might tell you to discriminate against homosexuals. However, the laws of the state say you cannot.