Oregon has become a very odd community.

Many of the people that live there now made bundles of money with lucrative jobs they had in Southern California and then selling their homes to move up to Oregon they were able to buy homes with cash, retire. Some of them had nothing to do and being that they can now live on trust funds they go into politics. The state has become extremely liberal and in some ways radical.

The radical Islams there, I mean radical Christians, I mean radical LGBTQ’s changed laws to make everything equal especially for the forgotten downtrodden groups like gays, yet the odd thing is now they treat the religious groups different, unequal.

Religion happens to be a protected class too you know yet at every level now we see radical LGBTQ’s involved in this change. They claim they are fighting for equality while they are not in all cases, and when you challenge them when they are wrong, they get mad, very very mad.

The case of the Sweet Cakes religious preference matter where the owners stated they could not express themselves by being forced into decorating a cake with gay wedding theme takes the cake. The militant radical LGBTQXYZ community one of whom’s leader is Alan DeGenerate (we are pretending here) keeps insisting that expressing one’s self in a certain way in business must be forced upon all businesses equally but the fact is it’s not equal.

Let’s use as an example condoms instead of cakes. The drug store sells condoms next door to the burned down Christian owned cake shop. They sell condoms at $6.69 cents per package of 3. The owner of the store is Christian and says Christ did not sell condoms but feels they are not forbidden and using condoms prevents unwanted touching from the sperm to the egg thus helps unwanted pregnancy and unwanted touching of aborted fetuses. He sells them to everyone equally.

If he only sold them to men, that would be sexist and illegal. If he changed the price adding $10 to LGBQT customers that would be illegal. If he sold them to women and men but asked first a whole series of questions and then decided that he would not sell them to gays, or bisexuals, but would sell them to straights, that would be unfair and illegal. The factor here is that the product is the same no matter who it’s sold to. A business has a right to choose what he wants to sell and not sell. It can choose what price to sell it at but it has to sell it equally. Some things can be based on age where government decides the weight of age matters more than equality.

Cigarettes and alcohol have a legal age requirement, still, those products if available for purchase must be sold equally to everyone unless of course someone throws a tantrum. In that case, the 17 year old tantrum thrower does not get what he wants by screaming that he’s not being treated the same as the 22 year old, wildly and loudly claiming age discrimination which is illegal, as he saw the 22 year old buy cigarettes in front of him. The owner even has a right to UNEQUALLY throw him out of the store for how he acted. These laws are in place already regarding age but they weren’t always there as these issued came up over time just like how this cake decorating thing came up.

These things get sorted out. Laws get enacted. In the case of decorating the Supreme Court of the United States made it clear that in this case the owner is allowed to discriminate because his religious expression takes precedence AND he does not ever offer that service of that exact kind of decoration. He never discriminated regarding selling identical items to different types of customers. The cake decorator did not discriminate against the gay couple for being gay, or for being men, or for getting married together, he discriminated based on the fact that he never provides that exact product that they wanted that they were trying to force on him.

Actually that’s not discrimination, it’s choosing what products a store wants to offer, it’s refusing to be bossed around. It’s refusing to be forced to provide something that he does not provide. A business can provide what they want and don’t want based on whatever they feel like providing. The idea that the gay couple can force them to provide a product that is not provided is like forcing a Christian book store to provide books on sadomasochistic lesbian sex which in the mind of the business owner is like working with the Devil himself. You just can’t force businesses to provide things they don’t want to provide.

The lesbian couple could walk in that store, say they are Christians, say that the store provides many books on sexual relations, demand they provide sadomasochistic sex books for lesbians, have a fit, get all the radical QWERTY’s to fight, rally, etc, and go to court, and would lose just like this gay couple whining about not being treated equally, demanding a gay wedding cake, trying to force on that Christian business to MAKE A PRODUCT THAT THEY DON’T CARRY. The idea that the store made custom cakes for straight couples thus they are being discriminated against doesn’t fly, THEY NEVER MAKE THE PRODUCT THAT THIS COUPLE WANTED and to force them is not fair by any stretch.

When that cake baker next door refused to decorate the cake for a gay couple the way the gay couple wanted it to look which he disagreed with whereas it would hurt him so deep on the level of his very core of being, that is a very different situation and because in the USA we respect ones personal religious beliefs at a very high level that would be considered fair enough. No it’s not equal, it’s not fantastic, it’s hurtful to one party, but it’s fair to choose not to sell that item, an item that basically only exists if the business CREATES IT. Another way of putting this is the owner gives birth to the product. It is unfair to demand anyone give birth to a product or conceive a product that they object to. It’s RAPE plain and simple. They are raping the business forcing conception of their baby.

All this wacked out radical fag LG bisexual Q (what is Q?) screaming about equality is absurd. There is no such thing as 100% equality and thus there has to be some give and take with where the priority in FAIRNESS lies. With decorating cakes it is not fair for the seller to sell a cake that say has the writing “Condoms are only $6.69” on it and refuse to sell it to a gay couple when that owner will sell it to a straight couple. That is discrimination and unfair. The fact that they are gay has no bearing on selling an IDENTICAL PRODUCT to them or not selling it. The product is the product, a business must sell the same item to everyone the same way.

The problem lies when a customer demands unequal treatment as was the case with the gay couple, insisting that a special made completely different product that they never provide to anyone be made special for them. How much more unequal treatment can there be than that! The gay couple insisted to the level of making it a legal matter going to the Supreme Court, and lost their case, because they were UNEQUALLY TREATING THE BUSINESS.

I don’t understand why the fag QWERTY community does not get that. If a gay owned cake shop does not want to sell a special cake that a Rainbow Supremecist wants made that says “God Hates Fags and QWERTYS” should they be FORCED into making this product that they never sell, would never sell, have never sold ever? Of course not yet the LGBT loud mouths that have pushed this “inequality” claim don’t seem to be able to process this logic.

In my writing I hope that it will help them understand.

Here’s another example, should an asexual business owner be forced to decorate a rally for a religious group that hates gays with signs that say “We hate the LGBT community” and such? If you are going to claim that Christian cake decorators can be forced into decorating a cake with two men on it against their will then you have to make the law apply equally don’t you, and that asexual transgendered bisexual lesbian will be forced into spending an entire week making signs that also say “Fags suck” and “LGBTAQ’s are going to hell, good!”

We don’t want people in the USA to be forced into such things, thus the decision by the Supreme Court was fair.

Now let’s have a fundraiser to help that Oregon Christian cake baker couple reopen their store now that we have figured out what is fair.

Some radical QWERTY’s burned down the shop after vandalizing the owners home and car. How is that equal?

In a similar ruling by the Supreme Court, the free speech of prolife anti-abortion centers in California have the right to their beliefs and to speak them freely. They give advice and counseling to women looking for help. The court decided it was an undue burden on those centers to be FORCED to act in a way that was against their beliefs. The liberal run state of California created laws that would force those centers to provide products of speech that fit the State’s view, not theirs, and that was like this cake decorating thing, individual businesses have more protection when it comes to what they offer their customers.

The Nazi State cannot come in and force speech and expression that is dictated.

If the prolife anti-abortion center was to tell the gay couple with their new gay wedding cake in hand that they will not assist them because they are gay and men that might be different, they might be going to the center to find out more about abortion in case they fucked a woman and didn’t want a baby, but if the business only serves women, even though that is sexist, they can choose to only serve women because it’s women who have babies and not men.

reference

Feature image by Pixabay.com