http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/07/06/starnes-oregon-silences-bakers-who-refused-make-cake-gay-wedding?cmpid=NL_foxnation/

Fox Nation
Politics

Starnes: Oregon Silences Bakers Who Refused To Make Cake For Gay Wedding

Published July 6, 2015
livefyre
By Todd Starnes, Fox News

Shut up! Don’t say another word.

That’s what the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI) is telling the owners of Sweet Cakes By Melissa, a bakery owned by Christians who refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding.

On Friday the state ordered owners Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in damages to a lesbian couple they turned away in 2013.

The state also slapped a gag order on the evangelical Christian bakers – banning them from speaking publicly about their refusal to participate in or bake wedding cakes for same-sex unions.

“This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” Mrs. Klein wrote on Facebook. “According to the state of Oregon, we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech.”

--------------------------------------------------------
LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/#navtype=navbar/

Nation
Former Oregon bakery owners must pay $135,000 for denying lesbians wedding cake
Same-sex wedding cake
Some bakers provide wedding cakes for same-sex marriages. Others, including an Oregon bakery, have refused. (Anne Cusack / Los Angeles Times)
By MICHAEL MUSKAL contact the reporter
Gay Rights
The former owners of an Oregon bakery have been ordered to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple who were refused a wedding cake, in the latest front in the battle between religious liberty and individual rights.


lRelated
NATION NOW
Kentucky clerk against same-sex marriage: 'I hope they don't sue me'
SEE ALL RELATED

Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein, who owned the Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery in Gresham, Ore., to compensate the couple for emotional and mental suffering that resulted from the denial of service.

Christian activist decries 'evil' gay marriage with a honey-smooth voice
Christian activist decries 'evil' gay marriage with a honey-smooth voice
The Kleins had cited their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage in refusing to make the wedding cake for Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer.

Avakian's final order, issued Thursday, had been expected in the dispute that dates from 2013, one of several around the nation involving bakers, florists and photographers who have refused to provide services to same-sex couples on religious grounds.

Oregon law bars businesses from discriminating or refusing service based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot turn away customers because of race, sex, disability, age or religion.

According to the state Bureau of Labor and Industries’ report, Rachel Bowman-Cryer and her mother attended a bridal show in Portland where the Kleins had a booth advertising their wedding cakes. Bowman-Cryer and her mother went to a cake-tasting at the bakery in 2013.

When Aaron Klein was told there would be two brides, Rachel and Laurel, he responded that he was sorry, but the bakery did not do wedding cakes for same-sex couples because of his and his wife’s religious convictions, according to the report.

Bowman-Cryer reportedly left in tears with her mother.

Should religion give businesses an excuse to not serve gay couples?
Should religion give businesses an excuse to not serve gay couples?
The Bowman-Cryers held a commitment ceremony in June 2013 and were married in May 2014, shortly after a federal judge struck down Oregon’s ban on same-sex marriage.

In August 2013, the brides filed a complaint with the state Bureau of Labor and Industries, and the agency brought charges against the Kleins in January 2014.

Aaron Klein said his family had suffered because of the case and the glare of media attention.

The bakery’s car was vandalized and broken into twice, he said. Photographers and florists severed ties with the company, eventually forcing the Kleins to close their storefront shop in September 2013.

In a Facebook post, the Kleins vowed to contest the ruling.

“We will NOT give up this fight, and we will NOT be silenced,” they wrote. “We stand for God’s truth, God’s word and freedom for ALL Americans.”

michael.muskal@latimes.com

Space booked

So far, this looks like yet another case of irresponsible and factually false reporting by Fox and others.

It is common to direct people who are in the midst of litigation from publicly commenting on the case they are involved in.

As reported so far, this isn't an attack on freedom of speech, it's a standard move designed to limit the people in the case from trying to have their case decided by mob rule.

the case has been decided... the gag order is after the decision

No appeal?

Your post appears to be false. The article by Fox News states:

"The Kleins were ordered to “cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published, circulated, issued or displayed, any communication, notice, advertisement or sign of any kind to the effect that any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services or privileges of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination will be made against, any person on account of sexual orientation.”

The order was signed by Brad Avakian, the commissioner of the BOLI and a vocal supporter of the LGBTQIA community."

Gag orders are not made after decisions are made and free speech appears to have been removed by an agency without any such authority.

It seems to me that the bakers in this case could take another approach that would give them what they want without violating Oregon law.

Christian Bakers & Businesses have been targeted for YEARS by LGBT. There is one case on here, where a guy went to THIRTEEN bakeries.

https://www.google.com/m?q=Christian+Buisnesses+targeted&client=ms-opera-mobile&channel=new&espv=1#channel=new&q=Christian+Businesses+targeted/

2 days ago-
-http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/american-dispatch/50401-oregon-puts-gag-order-on-persecuted-christian-bakers/

Puts Gag Order on Persecuted Christian Bakers
11:30AM EDT 7/6/2015
Todd Starnes

Aaron and Melissa Klein of SweetCakes by Melissa
Aaron and Melissa Klein of SweetCakes by Melissa (Courtesy)

Shut up! Don't say another word.

That's what the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry (BOLI) is telling the owners of Sweet Cakes By Melissa, a bakery owned by Christians who refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding.

On Friday the state ordered owners Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in damages to a lesbian couple they turned away in 2013.

The state also slapped a gag order on the evangelical Christian bakers—banning them from speaking publicly about their refusal to participate in or bake wedding cakes for same-sex unions.

"This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights," Mrs. Klein wrote on Facebook. "According to the state of Oregon, we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech."

The Kleins were ordered to "cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published, circulated, issued or displayed, any communication, notice, advertisement or sign of any kind to the effect that any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services or privileges of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination will be made against, any person on account of sexual orientation."

The order was signed by Brad Avakian, the commissioner of the BOLI and a vocal supporter of the LGBTQIA community.

"Within Oregon's public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society," the ruling states. "The ability to enter public places, to shop and dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry."

On a side note here—I predicted that once gay marriage was legalized, LGBTQIA supporters would attempt to silence all dissent.

Avakian has publicly stated his intentions to target Christian business owners who do not comply with his way of thinking. Here's what he told The Oregonian about Sweet Cakes By Melissa in 2013:

"The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate."

Here we have a government employee who wants to "rehabilitate" Christian business owners like the Kleins. How exactly does Avakian plan on purging their religious beliefs? Is the state of Oregon running a re-education camp? Or maybe they prefer to use shock therapy.

I'm truly interested to know what sort of conversion therapy treatments Avakian uses. However, he won't return my telephone calls.

The Kleins did not seem all that concerned about Avakian's order to remain silent. The first thing they did after reading his edict was to call me.

"I don't really care," Mr. Klein told me. "This man has no power over me. He seems to think he can tell me to be quiet. That doesn't sit well with me—and I refuse to comply."

The Kleins tell me they have been ordered not to speak to any news organizations or speak publicly—an order they violated when they called me.

"They picked the wrong guy," Mr. Klein said. "When my constitutional freedoms have been violated by the state, I'm going to speak out. That's the way it is."

Mrs. Klein told me she was shocked that the state of Oregon thinks they have the power to silence her voice.

"For us to not be able to speak about it—that's our freedom of speech," she said. "All Americans should be free to live and work by their faith and speak their mind."

Since 2013 the Kleins and their five children have become targets of LGBTQIA activists and their supporters. They eventually had to shut down their retail store after they were hit with boycotts and protests.

Their children were subjected to death threats and the family had to install security at their rural home.

Mr. Klein had to take a job picking up garbage after LGBTQIA activists and their cronies threatened other wedding vendors who did business with Sweet Cakes By Melissa.

In spite of the LGBTQIA bullying, the Kleins remain steadfast in their faith and will refuse to bow down to the government.

"God is awesome," Mrs. Klein told me. "He is taking care of us. I'm not sad about it at all. It is what it is. God opens doors and shuts doors."

The family has launched a donation page on Facebook to help defray the expenses of their fight with the state of Oregon.

Friends, it is open season on Catholics and Evangelical Christians—and I suspect we will hear more stories from Christian business owners just like the Kleins—targeted by LGBTQIA activists and their minions.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy tried to reassure Americans that religious liberty would be protected now that the Court redefined marriage.

"The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered," he wrote.

Perhaps Justice Kennedy should tell that to Aaron and Melissa Klein. They tried to live out the central principles of their lives and faith—and were slapped with a $135,000 fine and a cease and desist order.

Charisma Magazine
July 2015

Related topics: First Amendment | Gay agenda | Religious Freedom | Religious Liberty .

Oregon's Brad Avakian has forced a gag order against a Christian couple who refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding.
Oregon Declares War on the Christian Faith
This is an outrage and a travesty, and it must be rebuked and resisted. Who does Mr. Avakian think ...

Actually, just the stuff reported here by the thread originator, shows that my guess is correct.



Add to that, the proclamation by the defendants that they are not accepting the court decision, and you have exactly what I said: NOT an attack on "free speech," but standard legal procedure.

Advertising discrimination or intent to discriminate is NOT protected speech.

2 days ago..

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/07/bolis_sweet_cakes_judgment_tak.html/

BOLI's Sweet Cakes judgment takes aim at free speech: Editorial

The Oregonian Editorial Board
on July 07, 2015 at 3:40 PM, updated July 07, 2015 at 3:49 PM

It seemed like - just maybe - the controversy that began two and a half years ago when a Gresham bakery refused to make a cake for a lesbian couple's wedding ceremony could be drawing to a close.

The refusal by the Christian owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa to make the cake was a cut-and-dried instance of illegal discrimination, delivered with a layer of Leviticus-inspired homophobia on top. The lesbian couple, Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer, understandably filed a complaint against the bakery with the Bureau of Labor and Industries for breaking the law as a business of public accommodation.

But the final order issued by Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian last week ensures that it is anything but final. In a bewildering order in desperate need of logic and common sense, Avakian not only imposes on the Kleins a $135,000 judgment but also basically revokes their right to free speech.

After all, when a high-profile opportunity for political grandstanding comes along, why keep it simple?

Avakian found that the Bowman-Cryers deserve $135,000 for their pain and suffering from the cake denial. This award, he clarified, is not a fine or a civil penalty. In fact, Avakian lacks the statutory authority to take that kind of action or to even punish the Kleins for their illegal conduct, BOLI confirmed. But Oregon's top cake crusader is making up for that lack of authority through the only power he does have in a case like this: To order damages for economic loss, of which there was none, or for pain and suffering.

Oregonian editorials
Editorials reflect the collective opinion of The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board, which operates independently of the newsroom.
Members of the editorial board are Mark Hester,
Helen Jung, Erik Lukens,
Steve Moss and Len Reed.

Avakian contends the award is in line with other cases. He footnotes, among others, the 2010 case of Charles Edward Minor, who was ordered to pay a 21-year-old female employee $50,000 for repeatedly sexually harassing her and striking her on the head twice. That's less than the $75,000 judgment for Rachel Bowman-Cryer and the $60,000 award to Laurel Bowman-Cryer who, Avakian said, deserves less because she was not at the bakery for the cake denial and because her testimony about effects of the cake denial seemed "exaggerated" to the administrative law judge.

But while the amount is a doozy on its own, there's an even bigger surprise in the order. Avakian reversed the opinion of the administrative law judge who presided over the hearing and decided that Aaron Klein violated Oregon law when he recounted what happened on the day of the incident in an interview with a broadcast reporter. Among other things, Klein recalled in the September 2013 interview that when Rachel Bowman Cryer informed him the cake would be for two brides, he responded by telling her "we don't do same sex marriage, same sex wedding cakes."

In Avakian's view, Klein's verbatim recollection wasn't just explaining what happened in the past. Avakian contends his statement was, in essence, an advertisement that his bakery would continue to reject same-sex couples in the future. That, Avakian says, violates an Oregon statute that prohibits broadcasting an intent to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

Avakian also found that a note placed on the Kleins' shuttered Gresham bakery similarly violated the law. The note, which articulates the Kleins' frustration over the state's actions against them, includes a line that "this fight is not over." That shows they intend to keep discriminating, Avakian contends.

Actually... It doesn't. To most people, the line "this fight is not over" suggests that their fight is not over. At best, Avakian might be able to argue that it's ambiguous. But as First Amendment lawyer Jack Orchard notes, "you don't penalize people for ambiguous speech." Especially, he notes, when you have the force of government behind you.

No matter how odious the Kleins' actions were, no matter how objectionable their narrow-minded, bigoted and homophobic views are, Avakian's efforts to infringe on basic free-speech rights are even more threatening. His final order also demands that the Kleins cease and desist from making similar statements that could be interpreted – through the distorted lenses that Avakian appears to wear – as a veiled commitment to deny service. When even clear statements of opinion are misinterpreted, the clear message to the Kleins is keep your beliefs to yourself.

This is not to minimize in any way the pain and suffering that the Bowman-Cryers have felt throughout their lives. But much of their pain, as described in the findings, relate to treatment by family members, years of navigating the bigotry of those closest to them and the media attention associated with the case. Heaping the blame all on the one encounter with Sweet Cakes will only fuel the fire consuming any rational debate and do nothing to help Oregonians heal and find common ground.

In his order, Avakian insists that "this case is not about a wedding cake." And unfortunately for all of us, he has succeeded in making it about so much more.

- The Oregonian editorial board

Other cases of Oregon's Fight to MAINTAIN Free Speech

Students -22 hrs ago

http://www.oregonlive.com/tualatin/index.ssf/2015/07/new_district_policy_gives_tiga.html/

Union - July 8, 2015

http://mobile.dudamobile.com/site/oregoncatalyst/

20 hours ago..

http://overlawyered.com/2015/07/oregon-bakers-statements-to-national-media-were-unlawful/

Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System
Oregon: bakers’ statements to national media were “unlawful”

Readers who follow the battles over forfeiture law may recall the recent case in which a North Carolina convenience store owner from whom the government had seized $107,000 without any showing of wrongdoing decided to fight the case in the press as well as in court, backed by the Institute for Justice. Lyndon McLellan’s decision to go public with the dispute drew a menacing letter from a federal prosecutor about the publicity the case had been getting:

“Your client needs to resolve this or litigate it,” Mr. West wrote. “But publicity about it doesn’t help. It just ratchets up feelings in the agency.” He concluded with a settlement offer in which the government would keep half the money.
That case ended happily, but the problem is much broader: many individuals and businesses fear that if they seek out favorable media coverage about their battle with the government, the government will find a way to retaliate, either informally in settlement negotiations or by finding new charges to throw against them.

That such fears might not be without foundation is illustrated by last week’s widely publicized Oregon cake ruling, in which a Gresham, Oregon couple was ordered to pay $135,000 in emotional-distress damages for having refused to bake a cake for a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony. Aside from the ruling’s other objectionable elements, the state labor commissioner ruled it “unlawful” for the couple to have given national media interviews in which they expressed sentiments like “we can see this becoming an issue and we have to stand firm.” Taking advantage of an exception in free speech law in which courts have found that the First Amendment does not protect declarations of future intent to engage in unlawful discrimination, the state argued – and its commissioner agreed – that the “stand firm” remark along with several similarly general comments rallying supporters were together “unlawful.”

That ought to bother anyone who cares about free speech. I’ve got a piece up at Ricochet.com, my first there, exploring the question in more detail. Check it out [cross-posted from Cato at Liberty].

So much for the right to petition your government for redress of grievances.

Goldwater Institute files constitutional challenge to ICWA


wfjag on Oregon: bakers’ statements to national media were “unlawful”
Oregon: bakers' statements to national media were "unlawful" - Overlawyered on An observation on the $135,000 cake refusal
John Fembup on July 8 roundup
Free speech roundup - Overlawyered on Free speech roundup
Andrew_M_Garland on “We should eliminate them from the food supply.”

Past 21 hours... The state of Oregon is threatening the home of the Christian Bakers. - at least 10 articles
This is BIG government & control

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=AOOfVdyuGcnYeM2qr8AF&url=http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/09/h8-wins-oregon-threatens-home-of-christian-bakers/&ved=0CB0QqQIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF_C96wf8354DKHyEdMdHxRBwgWrA/



http://patriotupdate.com/2015/07/oregon-threatens-home-of-christian-bakers/

Miscegenation laws use to be commonplace here in the US.
Most commonly that meant that it was against the law for a black person to marry a white person. But in many states, these laws also applied to Asians and Native Americans- meaning it was against the law for them to marry whites. The government never really gave a damn who the non-whites married so long as they didn't sully white people with their inferior blood.
From 1913 to 1948 30 out of the then 48 state enforced miscegenation laws. And 16 state continued to enforce these laws up until the supreme court overturned them in 1967

And many good 'Christians' vehemently believed that it was sinful and against the will of God for the races to intermix. They could, and many still can, give you chapter and verse that supports this position. The Klu Klux Klan thumps their bible just as hard today as they did 50 years ago and 150 years ago.
We may all be God's children but thou salt not have children together- know what I mean Verne?

And you can bet your sweet cupcakes that many a good 'Christian' baker down south- or perhaps not so far- has refused prepare a wedding cake for a mixed race couple. And you can be certain they felt quite righteous doing so.

If you want to run around calling yourself a 'Christian' then maybe you should adhere a little more closely to what to what Jesus had to say. AND the things he didn't think important enough to mention.
One of the few prohibitions directly attributed to Christ was the one against judging your brothers and sisters.
If it is your belief that homosexuality is a sin, then you should by all means avoid doing it, but it is not your place to judge someone else. And the refusal to make that cake is clearly a stone that came easily to hand.
And if you simply can't suppress your need to enforce 'the will of Jesus Christ' perhaps it should be noted that in all his travels and with the multitudes of people he encountered, he had to have met a few homosexuals- they have always been there- and yet he never thought it was important enough to mention. He also made no mention of race mixing.
On the other hand, he did explicitly speak against divorce. So as a 'Christian' if you want to refuse to make cakes for sinners, the people you should be turning away are all those heterosexuals on their 2nd 3rd and whatever marriages.

I do want to add however that all the 'pain and suffering bushwa is well... bushwa. But examples have to be made because the people get very angry when you try to melt down their sacred cows. You gotta hose 'em down with that molten gold until they get with the program.

P.S. I am a Christian- or at least I keep trying to be, and I am personally very very heterosexual, though sometimes I wish I could be a lesbian, I would have a lot more dates.

land of the free... i call bull$h1t.

land of overgrown out of control government is more like it.