Note Three: You LGBT exhibitionists want to stick it down everybody’s throat, and you can interpret that literally, because that is what you are trying to do. And the cowardly Supreme Court is complicit in the conspiracy not in what they said, but what they didn’t say.
You’ve gone after another bakery, and the court says that bakery has to bake you a wedding cake. But the decision will be appealed. There is a group behind this bakery willing to put up the money for the appeal. The bakery owner certainly does not have that kind of money.
I really can’t understand why you can’t find another bakery or whatever for your ceremony and festivities. One that would be glad to do for you.
I know a gay couple, two of the nicest men you would ever want to meet. They run an assisted living/nursing home. Their residents/patients receive the best care in the state. They don’t go around flaunting who they are. That’s not foremost in their minds, their residents and patients are.
There are other gay and lesbian couples I’ve known who are a conundrum. In the gay couple one of them has to try and act like a woman, and in the lesbian couple one of them has to try and act like a man. Rather odd that they are trying to imitate what other people would consider a normal man and woman couple. Why is that?
But you exhibitionists have to try and ingratiate yourself into everybody else’s lives. Stir up as much trouble as you can, instead of living peaceably, without causing a ruckus. I don’t like you, and but for the law, I would call you by names you deserve. Names people have called you in the past, because your actions are designed to destroy as much of society as you possibly can.
Now the courts want to say you can’t be discriminated against. What about the other people who’s religious freedoms are being discriminated against? The people you are purposely trying to antagonize?
The Supreme Court ignored the Constitution on religious freedom, and gave you all the rights. They could have resolved the issue very simply. They could have ruled that gay marriage is legal, but individuals and companies with religious beliefs in contradiction with that don’t have to be forced to deal with LGBTs if they don’t want to. The bakeries can hang a sign in the window that says. “We do not cater LGBT weddings, because it is contrary to our religious beliefs”.
Instead you the Supreme Court will allow this harassment by the LGBT exhibitionists to continue another three or four years until a case winds up in your court where you have to decide if indeed people do have legitimate religious beliefs’ rights. The liberal justices will decide the same way they did on gay rights marriages, but the deciding judge (wasn’t that Kennedy) might swing the 5-4 decision in the gay rights marriage the other way on this one.
And if you think they’re only after bakeries, think again. Tennessee just issued a birth certificate where there is no mother or father, only parent one and parent two. Get ready for the onslaught.
Note Two: On the night the Supreme Court approved gay marriage, Obama lit up the White House with the rainbow colors of the LGBTs. On the night of July 4th, he had a chance to attempt to bring people together by lighting the White House in red, white, and blue. He did not. His decision alone. No Congress. Not his White House staff. Obama. A dark White House.
This is as clear an example of Obama trying to divide the people of the United States as there can be. There have been arguments about him trying to divide people before, but I don’t think anybody in their sane mind can deny this one. I thought he was President of the entire United States, not just the people he picks and chooses. That’s about as destructive as a President can get.
Note One: I didn’t start out to write a trilogy, first a gay wedding in the Rose Parade, then a total disrespect of the Iwo Jima flag raising in 1945, and now a lesbian couple is awarded a $135,000 fine from a bakery in Oregon. The Fourth of July should be a joyous occasion, but there are ominous bodings about.
Original story below.
These People Want to Destroy You. Isis? Sure, but these people are much closer to home. LGBTs. That’s a conjunctive phrase that seems to be acceptable to the LGBT community. I’m writing about the Oregon lesbian couple who put a Gresham, Oregon bakery out of business, and that’s the L in LGBT, so on that basis I can blame the whole lot.
Sweet Cakes by Melissa refused to bake a wedding cake in 2013 for a lesbian wedding. The lesbian couple complained to the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries. Just last week the Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian awarded $135,000 to the lesbian couple, $75,000 to Rachel Bowman-Cryer and $60,000 to Laurel Bowman-Cryer. I wonder how Avakian figured out that Rachel had suffered $15,000 more emotional distress than Laurel? Maybe Avakian sent the lesbian couple to a psychiatrist, and he made that determination when he reported back to Avakian. I would have sent them to a psychiatrist.
The Oregon Equality Act of 2007 allows exemptions for religious organizations and schools, but not business owners. The owners did not want to bake them a cake on religious grounds.
Oregon law appears to be in direct conflict with the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights concerning religious freedom. Last time I checked, the Constitution trumps all state laws, that is unless you take it before the U. S. Supreme Court, then your guess is as good as mine. A small business is normally a proprietary business, which would qualify individually for religious freedom under the Constitution.
Why didn’t these women go find them a bakery that wanted to bake them a cake? In my opinion, they wanted to cause trouble, and they did not seem to care if they put the bakery out of business.
Let’s do a little math here. Small town bakery, probably doing good to gross $1,000 a week. Let’s set the profit margin at 30%, probably a little high considering the cost of ingredients these days. That puts their yearly profit at $15,600. It would only take them 8.6 years to pay off that $135,000 fine. There’s a catch. They only operate from their home now.
Even doubling their business to $2,000 per week, it would take them 4.3 years to pay off the fine.
Both of those are assuming they don’t eat during that time or pay on a mortgage or rent a house. Four years or eight years is a long time to go without food.
What is in these lesbians’ hearts? Stone cold hearts in my opinion. There just seems to be a viciousness that in all of my years of writing feature stories I have never run across.
And those who support LGBTs, is this the way you live your lives, bent on destroying all who disagree with you? I know people who support LGBTs, and they don’t strike me as those types of people, but when they support LGBTs and any acts they decide to advance, then I must admit I only thought I knew these people, but obviously I didn’t.
You are known by the company you keep (LGBTs), and what they are willing to do. Are you willing to do the same thing yourself? Are you willing to put some small bakery out of business? Do you not respect the freedom of religion specified in the Constitution?
That’s troubling to me. I have known some of these people a long time. I would like for them to give me their explanation of why they have a blanket acceptance of all of these shenanigans, and why they believe in LGBTs insisting on a gay wedding in a family-oriented Rose Parade, a mockery of the raising of the flag on Iwo Jima, and a lesbian couple, in my opinion, hell-bent to destroy people.
I thought better of the people I have known. I must be wrong.