Lesbian couple with hidden cameras searched for baker who would decline to make a wedding cake
by Jonathon Van Maren, The Bridgehead:
Shortly after gay marriage was legalized in the US by the Supreme Court, one major LGBT activist and donor had an announcement to make about the future plans of the movement: It was time to “punish the wicked,” he said. The “wicked,” by the way, is now shorthand for “those who have religious objections to gay marriage.”
We’ve seen that unfold now for three years. Bakers, photographers, and other professionals have been targeted over their moral objections to same-sex marriage. After Jack Phillips won the Masterpiece Cakeshop case at the Supreme Court, LGBT activists promptly badgered him with new requests (including a request for a cake topped by the Devil performing a sex act) until they secured his refusal to bake a cake celebrating gender transition, and dragged Phillips back into court.
LGBT activists like to innocently claim that they have no choice but to persecute these Christian business owners, because it is impossible for them to carry on knowing that someone has deeply held moral objections to celebrating their relationship with them in a professional capacity. Some activists spend time phoning different establishments, attempting to ferret out opponents to the LGBT ideology in order to destroy their reputations through boycotts, protests, and social media vitriol. And as the Christian Post reported this month, some show up prepared for war:
Two lesbians who filed a complaint against a Christian baker after she declined to make a cake for a same-sex celebration wore hidden microphones to record the refusal, according to a press release from the baker’s attorneys.
“The evidence shows that this was all a set-up to get money and to destroy Cathy for her Christian faith,” said Charles LiMandri, attorney with the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund. “The couple never intended to actually celebrate their marriage with a custom cake from Tastries. We hope as this case moves forward, the full truth will come to light.”
The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) recently filed a new lawsuit against Cathy Miller of Tastries Bakery in Bakersfield, California, seeking financial damages for emotional distress suffered by the two women.
“Although they wanted only a simple wedding cake, the couple’s quest did not proceed as smoothly as their search for a venue. They visited several local bakeries and tasted cakes, but had been unsuccessful in their search when Eileen serendipitously drove past a bakery called Tastries,” the lawsuit states.
The women then found a “simple cake design” they liked in a display case and wanted to have it replicated, but when they returned for a tasting a week later, Miller referred them to another bakery after realizing the order was for a same-sex celebration.
“Tastries’ explicit refusal to sell the Rodriguez-Del Rios a wedding cake because they intended to celebrate their wedding so devastated the couple that they considered purchasing a premade, non-wedding cake from a grocery or big box store,” the complaint reads. “Once exciting, planning their wedding reception became a painful and emotionally upsetting process.”
The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund opines, however, that the women’s claims don’t add up.
“Although the lawsuit claims ‘Eileen and Mireya did not know what to do’ after the incident, the record shows the couple immediately took to social media, and within 30 minutes Miller began receiving death threats and emails containing images of people engaging in depraved sexual acts. News crews arrived shortly afterward,” the organization outlines.
The lawsuit also asserts that the women suffered both physically and emotionally, stating that “Mireya’s nose started to bleed—which was completely out of the ordinary—and she got a headache.” It further contends that “[a]lthough she tried to contain her emotions, Eileen later broke down, and her emotional anguish aggravated her rheumatoid arthritis.”
Miller’s attorneys say that they learned during the investigation stage of the case that the women had come prepared with hidden microphones, which raised questions about their motives.
“Despite the couple’s claim that they were ‘[s]tunned, hurt, and offended,’ facts discovered during investigation shows that the couple had intentionally been searching for a business that would ‘discriminate’ against them, wearing hidden microphones to catch a business owner in the act,” outlined the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund.
In other words, these women were functioning as activists and were fully intending to destroy this baker’s life should she decline to cooperate with their request. They were actively attempting to find someone who would refuse them, so that they could claim to be traumatized, demand money, and initiate a digital lynching of their target. This is malicious and unacceptable behavior—and the LGBT war on Christians who disagree with them has emboldened these sorts of people:
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
