Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Brickbat: Let Them Eat Cake

Charles Oliver | 4.30.2015 6:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
G. dallorto

An Oregon judge has ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 to Rachel Bowman-Cryer and Laurel Bowman-Cryer. The Kleins own a bakery and were found to have discriminated against the Bowman-Cryers after they refused to bake a cake for their wedding.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: $15 Minimum-Wage Movement Highlights Difference Between Progressives and Radicals

Charles Oliver is a contributing editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesPolitical CorrectnessGay Marriage
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (52)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Adans smith   10 years ago

    A 135 grand for hurt feeling? It's impossible for me to care about many in the gay marriage push.

    1. John Galt   10 years ago

      But it was a very serious microaggression. Wedding goers could've died without cake from that particular bakery.

      1. A Horse Called Trigger   10 years ago

        Christian cakes, like the blood of christian babies, has powerful mojo and grants great blessings on those who consume them.

    2. Win Bear   10 years ago

      The case is based on anti-discrimination law, which applies regardless of the legal status of gay marriage.

    3. Rhino   10 years ago

      I guess the more serious the punishment, the more likely people will comply?

  2. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

    A hundred and thirty five grand. Because they wouldn't bake them a cake. That they could drive down the street and buy a replacement for.

    At this point, I hope the judge and the Bowman-Cryers die in a fire. Slowly.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    "The important thing to realize is this," she added, "This is real money that Aaron and Melissa are going to have to pay that otherwise would be used to pay their mortgage and feed their kids."

    Breeders??? They're just digging their hole deeper with statements like this.

    1. PM   10 years ago

      It's kind of cute how they think anybody actually gives a fuck about their situation. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, amirite?

      1. UnCivilServant   10 years ago

        So how long is the Judge going to prison for then?

      2. Atanarjuat   10 years ago

        They committed a hate crime. They're lucky we're not sending them straight to Guantanamo Bay.

        1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

          That's why Obama wants to make friends with the Castros, so we can expand the base to take on prisoners of a different kind.

  4. Slammer   10 years ago

    Cryers get what they want, apparently.

    1. straffinrun   10 years ago

      Squeaky wheel gets the crease.

      1. John Galt   10 years ago

        Smelly bum gets the ram butter.

  5. Libertarian   10 years ago

    "The Bowman-Cryers both testified to the emotional stress they attributed to their experience with Sweet Cakes as well as the glare of media attention that soon followed."

    Media attention? Huh, I wonder who got the media involved? Also: FOUR days of testimony! Did the OJ trial last that long?

    1. UnCivilServant   10 years ago

      In 1995, the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson was televised for 134 days.

      No, you were off by 130 days.

      1. Libertarian   10 years ago

        I guess I need to work on my sarcasm technique.

        1. Swiss Servator, Switzier!   10 years ago

          Try the Southern Hook Palm Technique.

  6. The Hyperbole   10 years ago

    Rachel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her wife, Laurel Bowman-Cryer, $60,000

    So, even the LGBT community pays "woman" 80? on the dollar. Sexists!!!

    1. Rich   10 years ago

      Excellent.

    2. Swiss Servator, Switzier!   10 years ago

      Nicely done.

  7. straffinrun   10 years ago

    a Christian couple's insistence that their religious beliefs against same-sex marriage trump a state law

    Let's compromise and make it a 135k tax on not selling cakes to lesbians. Right Roberts?

    1. straffinrun   10 years ago

      BTW, the April 23 Brickbat title would've worked for this one, too.

    2. gary47290   10 years ago

      This entire thread misses the whole point of this case. Baking a cake has nothing to do with Free Exercise. This is solely about public accomodation laws.

      Unless the Klein's claim their faith requires them to be nasty to Gay people, your objections are nonsense. Willamette Weekly tested their resolve last year, and the Kleins had no objection to baking a divorce cake, or a celebration for a grant on stem cell research. This conclusively proves their objection is about "Gay" and not a traditional view of marriage.

      Unless you want to discuss repealing non-discrimination laws (which could be a Libertarian stance) you all are going hysterical for pointless reasons.

  8. Rufus J. Firefly   10 years ago

    135k?! Please tell me these folks can appeal.

    I hope these two fuckers go bankrupt and get their come-uppance- and the judge too.

    See, it's shit like this that doesn't make me sympathize with their 'cause'.

    1. UnCivilServant   10 years ago

      There's the final ruling by the commissioner, and they can appeal to the Oregon court of appeals. They can also try to appeal to federal court by claiming a violation of 1st and 13th amendment protections.

      1. Rhino   10 years ago

        YAY!!! i'm not the only one pointing out the 13th Amendment issue at play here.

  9. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    I think if I owned a cake shop or whatever they're called, I would put a sign up with a dictionary definition of marriage that states it's between a man and a woman. Then when the inevitable gay activists come in demanding a cake, I would make it for them without incident. Just to waste their time.

    1. Rufus J. Firefly   10 years ago

      I'd bake them the shittiest cake. All crooked and tasteless.

      In all seriousness, I hope this family aren't forced to close down.

      The price of a family losing their livelihood in a community is much greater than two asshole idiots with hurt feelings not getting a fucking, bloody effen cake. In fact, these two pos pretty much just extracted 135k. This is the overall arc to this story people seem to be missing in the comments of the article. And this thing equating gays to blacks is starting to irritate a little.

      I can just see the movie now: Scorned gay couple become ambulance chasers.

      1. UnCivilServant   10 years ago

        They've already had to close their storefront and are now operating a reduced business from their home.

        1. Rufus J. Firefly   10 years ago

          Unfuckingbelievable.

          1. Free Society   10 years ago

            So begins the age of social justice.

  10. Gordilocks   10 years ago

    The retards might not rule the night, but they sure ruled that courtroom.

    1. Almanian!   10 years ago

      I think the problem is that they locked eyes with 'em. Don;t lock eyes with 'em...

  11. Malkavian   10 years ago

    "The amounts recommended by law judge Alan McCullough, coming after four days of testimony, are not final."

    Four days of testimony? I bet the cops and prosecutors were sampling cakes as 'evidence'. Munch munch.

  12. Libertarian   10 years ago

    It's not as if the bakery promised a cake and then, on the wedding day, chose not to follow through. Even IF that was what had happened, $135,000 is ridiculous.

  13. Drake   10 years ago

    Does this mean Steve Crowder is going to be rich?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgWIhYAtan4

  14. sloopyinTEXAS   10 years ago

    So I just realized Kizone Kaprow is a sock puppet. In the comments s/he is going off from a libertarian position but on here s/he rails against us.

    Now I have to wonder which one of you it is.

    1. Ivan Pike   10 years ago

      Now I have to wonder which one of you it is.

      I have heard it is Mary.

  15. Rich   10 years ago

    "Religious freedom is a fundamental part of America, and is written into our state's constitution already. But those beliefs don't entitle any of us to discriminate against others."

    This stuff will never end, because no one can define "religious freedom" and no one can define "discrimination". If "religious freedom" exists, then so does "non-religious freedom". Do the beliefs of "non-religious freedom" entitle us to discriminate against others wearing "No shirt, no shoes"?

    1. CampingInYourPark   10 years ago

      Preferring to wear or not to wear certain apparel isn't essential to ones being like preferences concerning a partner's genitalia.

      *Meant to be read with with an Elena Kagan lisp

    2. Rhino   10 years ago

      discrimination now includes hurting the feelings of a protected class. And who knows what could offend the perpetually offended.

  16. Rich   10 years ago

    Rachel Bowman-Cryer and Laurel Bowman-Cryer

    Shouldn't at least one of those names be "Cryer-Bowman"? Otherwise, DISCRIMINATION!

  17. Radioactive   10 years ago

    I'd piss in the cake batter...you know just saying

    1. Rich   10 years ago

      Don't do that! Come on!

  18. Rich   10 years ago

    Rachel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her wife, Laurel Bowman-Cryer, $60,000

    Shouldn't that be "Laurel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her wife, Rachel Bowman-Cryer, $60,000"?

  19. Rebel Scum   10 years ago

    Fuck that judge an fuck anyone who thinks it is ok to coerce service from someone. That is all.

  20. Enjoy Every Sandwich   10 years ago

    Given that they're willing to create such a big shitstorm over a cake, it's hard for me to take them seriously when they claim that they've no intention to force ministers and churches to perform gay weddings. I think they're going to go there sooner or later, on the grounds that ministers are licensed by the state.

    1. Win Bear   10 years ago

      I think they're going to go there sooner or later, on the grounds that ministers are licensed by the state.

      Giving ministers and priests special legal powers is itself a dumb idea. The US should do what other countries have been doing for a long time: ministers and priests hold the religious ceremonies, but the legally relevant marriage license is handed out by a government office. Incidentally, that also would get rid of your concerns.

    2. Rhino   10 years ago

      Or they'll do it on the grounds that your religious freedom doesn't grant you the right to discriminate against gay people. If you disagree, then they'll take that to mean that you'd also agree with sharia law or forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist or allowing for human sacrifice, depending on the religion you wish to freely practice. The problem with the right using religion to fight back against anti-discrimination laws is that they can't do it consistently.

      Just get to the point. It's an involuntary servitude, 13th Amendment and a property rights issue.

  21. Free Society   10 years ago

    A win for the cause of slavery.

  22. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

    Ten years ago, I would have thought it was impossible to make Christian fundamentalists look like sympathetic victims to average people.

    It's sort of like how nobody felt sorry for the terrorists until the Bush Administration started torturing them.

    Violating people's rights creates sympathy for people who never would have enjoyed such sympathy otherwise. It's been that way since the Romans started throwing Christians to the lions.

    1. Rhino   10 years ago

      The liberals have no sympathy for Christians because they are more reliably a voting block for the Republicans. They're sympathy for the gay community, which votes for them more reliably, trumps their sympathy for actual oppression in this case. They know on what side their bread is buttered. And that matters more to them than civil rights or justice.

  23. Win Bear   10 years ago

    That's utterly stupid. I generally oppose anti-discrimination laws because I think they are unnecessary. This "Christian" bakery already has been pretty much driven out of business by people making individual choices to cut ties with them. That's all that's needed.

  24. tz   10 years ago

    You missed where it gets worse.

    http://www.christianpost.com/n.....ng-138266/

    GoFundMe had a page to help them, then they pulled it down.

  25. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

    It's an administrative law judge, not a real judge. In effect, he makes recommendations to the labor dept of the state.

  26. Wedding Planning   10 years ago

    It's sad that stories like this is still considered news. What about positive news stories that we can be proud to tell our children?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Freedom Lovers Can Reckon with Addicts and Addiction

Daniel Akst | 6.15.2025 7:00 AM

Ross Douthat on Digital Alienation, Birth Rates, and Demographic Collapse

Liz Wolfe and Zach Weissmueller | From the July 2025 issue

More Than 1,800 'No Kings' Protests Aim for Nonviolent Pushback Against Trump Policies

Nancy Rommelmann | 6.14.2025 10:10 AM

Have Presidents Grown Too Powerful To Be Removed From Office?

Gene Healy | 6.14.2025 8:00 AM

Some Federal Agencies Are Actually Getting More Efficient

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 6.14.2025 7:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!