How Will Oregon Bakers Melissa And Aaron Klein Celebrate Independence Day After Lesbians And The Court System Molested Them?

Please: Those of you who are disciples of Christ, please pray for, encourage and help support Aaron and Melissa Klein as they experience persecution from hate-mongering lesbians and a despicable court system of injustice. Their sad story is told in the following link and excerpt below.

You can be sure that LGBT activists will strike their poisonous persecuting venom against Christian pastors and Christian Churches. Evidence of that hate-mongering is how they celebrated the recent vile Supreme Court decision. Pic source: Found in Cyberspace.

You can be sure that LGBT activists will strike their poisonous persecuting venom against Christian pastors, Christian churches and their educational institutions and agencies. Some evidence of that hate-mongering, is how certain, celebrated the recent vile Supreme Court decision with their putrid displays of mockery against Christ & Christianity and the Holy Scriptures. Pic source: Found in Cyberspace.

What will be the future molestation efforts of certain LGBT activists upon those with whom they disagree? A likely scenario will be that homosexual (“homofascist”) activists will attempt to bring their molesting multiple lawsuits against individual church bodies, their schools, church related agencies and even individual parishes and their perspective pastors.

There seems to be no end to the rabid actions of LGBT activists. Now that they have experienced what they perceive as a “green light” from the U.S. Supreme Court, they are likely to slither their slimy lawsuit actions into (and against) all segments of civilized U.S. society and culture.

This Moralmatters author and Christian emeritus pastor is convinced that certain LGBT activists who prey upon those who practice their God-given natural and 1st Amendment rights, do so, because they instinctively know that they are non-normative and aberrant in their sexual practice behaviors. Hence, the desperate homofascist legal law-suit actions, to convince themselves that they are “normal” in a natural sense and in a Scriptural sense. This author can still hear his trusted (now deceased) friend say of such unscrupulous [nasty] people:

“Sick bastards!”

State Silences Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple, Fines Them $135K –


<<<<<<<<<< Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian finalized a preliminary ruling today ordering Aaron and Melissa Klein, the bakers who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, to pay $135,000 in emotional damages to the couple they denied service……..

………In the ruling, Avakian placed an effective gag order on the Kleins, ordering them to “cease and desist” from speaking publicly about not wanting to bake cakes for same-sex weddings based on their Christian beliefs.

“This effectively strips us of all our First Amendment rights,” the Kleins, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, which has since closed, wrote on their Facebook page. “According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech.”………

The LGBT activists are no longer content in being given temporal "legal" [not moral] rights to practice their non-normative aberrant lifestyles. No! They have to make everyone else's life miserable. It's no wonder this segment of the culture suffers a high suicide rate.

The LGBT activists are no longer content in being given temporal “legal” [not moral] rights to practice their non-normative aberrant lifestyles. No! They have to make everyone else’s life miserable. It’s no wonder their segment of the culture suffers an extremely high suicide rate. Please note: “Help for homosexuals” –

……..The case began in February 2013 when Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer filed a complaint against the Kleins for refusing to bake them a wedding cake.

At the time of the refusal, same-sex marriage had not yet been legalized in Oregon………

……..In order to reach the total amount, $135,000, Rachel and Laurel submitted a long list of alleged physical, emotional and mental damages they claim to have experienced as a result of the Kleins’ unlawful conduct.

Examples of symptoms included “acute loss of confidence,” “doubt,” “excessive sleep,” “felt mentally raped, dirty and shameful,” “high blood pressure,” “impaired digestion,” “loss of appetite,” “migraine headaches,” “pale and sick at home after work,” “resumption of smoking habit,” “shock” “stunned,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “weight gain” and “worry.”

In their Facebook post, the Kleins signaled their intention to appeal Avakian’s ruling, writing, “We will not give up this fight and we will not be silenced,” already perhaps putting themselves at risk of violating the cease and desist.” >>>>>>>>>>>


Related informational links to the above:

Also related:

The transgender movement is not the new civil rights frontier –


……The complete normality of transexualism is fast becoming the new orthodoxy. However, writing in the Wall Street Journal last week, a leading psychiatrist, Dr Paul McHugh, described this as a terrible error.

“This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken—it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes … ”………. –

Former Johns Hopkins head psychiatrist: ‘transgender surgery isn’t the solution’ –

BOOM: Former Chief Psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins Has Some BRUTAL News for “Caitlyn” Jenner –

Homofascism: Eric Rush Scenario Describes Its Molestation And Boomerang Effect –


“A thinking person will question what he hears; examine what he sees; and evaluate what others would have him believe.”

“When did big government and its mainstream media tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?”

[Pastor emeritus Nathan M. Bickel] 


  Posted by:

Pastor emeritus Nathan M. Bickel


Featured pic source of Nazi Fascist flag:

Found on the web.


13 thoughts on “How Will Oregon Bakers Melissa And Aaron Klein Celebrate Independence Day After Lesbians And The Court System Molested Them?

  1. Hakkaa Päälle says:

    What these bakers did was to discriminate against two people who came into their business to buy a cake. Discrimination is against the law. If you somehow cannot accept business from certain individuals because you have personal convictions, then you must close your business. The law of the land prohibits discrimination against people “just because.” If a business refuses to serve anyone who is honest and law-abiding, then that business has violated the law. The laws are in place to protect every one of us who may not meet the unspoken standards of a proprietor of a business.

    Try to imagine a doctor who refuses to treat a badly injured man, allowing that man to die, simply because the patient is gay and the doctor has moral reservations about his ungodly lifestyle. Now imagine that the man who died for that reason is your son or your brother. Would you say that the doctor was a Righteous man to follow his conscience and refuse to treat an immoral sinner?

    Your life is not your own after you open the doors of your business to the public.

    1. Hakkaa Päälle –

      You substantiate your assertions, but apparently fail to recognize that First Amendment rights were long ago made plain by the founding and framing Fathers of this United States. That bastion pillar of freedom should never be replaced because 2 lesbians run like stuck squealing pigs to court and find a weak-kneed judge to pour out their vitriol upon a couple, who for no ill-intent on their part, refused to act against their conscience and their practice of religion. [I thought our crooked culture practiced “multiculturalism” – that being, that “all value systems were equal.”]

      Secondly, it wasn’t as if the lesbian activists were without recourse. They could have sought out an LGBT bakery source or baked their own cake. Instead they willfully intended to wreak havoc upon a woman, her husband and their children, bring intolerable damage upon the man and wife’s livelihood.

      Incidentally, I find no ill-will or ill motive upon the bakery couple. But, upon the activist lesbians, there appear to be an egregious motive of ill-will. Clearly their motives were intended to mete out havoc. And they found an undiscerning judge as their convenient water-boy. Hence, they won their case.

      Thirdly, I find your analogy about a doctor refusing to treat a badly injured man, to be a very weak and flawed analogy. In the case of the activist lesbians, it wasn’t a “life and death” situation. You apparently are indiscriminate in comparing and contrasting a medical scenario with that of a free-market scenario.

      Furthermore, I find your reasoning quite flaccid. Should my wife and I bring lawsuit against one of our local grocery stores because it no longer carries Perdue chickens and, there is no foreseeable future in which it will bring back these non-GMO fed and free range chickens?

      Finally, there are all kinds of refusals happening in our culture. The Supreme Court refuses to take on major cases. But who would even dare to bring lawsuits against the 9 justices? Do you think that if this lesbian couple were refused by a Muslim bakery that they would try to force that Muslim bakery at lawsuit gun-point, demanding: “Bake our damned cake?!”

  2. Douglas says:

    The case before us today is Oregon Law 659A.030¹
    ‘’Discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age [is] prohibited.’’

    When the baker refused service to the two ladies, the baker should have immediately closed up the shop and campaigned to change the Law.

    Its not a good idea to mix the Law and Religion. I like to keep Church and State separate as the Constitution requires.

    Jesus demanded that the bankers leave the Temple and that people should pray in private.

    1. Douglas –

      With all due respect for your excellent comment. I have to take exception.

      I don’t believe that the court evidenced that the baker was actively discriminating against “sex” or “sexual orientation,” as it was a business that sold its baked goods to anyone.

      The incident that was pounced upon by the lesbian activists was the baker’s preferential refusal to bake a homo lesbian wedding cake. That’s no more than me asking a framing carpenter if he would do some elaborate kitchen cabinetry work. I would not take him to court for his refusal. I would recognize that my request is not his expertise and that he would not care to venture there. Asking a heterosexual to bake a homosexual lesbian wedding cake is preposterous!

      Also, if I’m not mistaken, the activist lesbians failed to evidence their alleged injuries. They only listed all of them in their complaint paperwork. Apparently, the court and judge granted them “standing” and a favorable decision, because they squawked. They were females. And, they claimed to be lesbians. Was their claim of being lesbians ever proved? Did the judge set up a secret court camera to view their alleged sexual orientation “activities?”

      Finally, I must say that this whole case smacks something very obtuse. Why would the bakers be hit with a gag order not to talk about the court case? As I suggested in my other comment reply, First Amendment rights trumpts this political correctness garbage.

      State Silences Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple, Fines Them $135K

      1. Douglas says:

        I’m concerned about the husband Aaron who claims that he’s now a garbage collector. Ok so he’s a garbage collector but does he collect everyone’s garbage or just from certain people he approves of? Does he ever collect gay garbage?

        I suspect that he might even collect the garbage from this lesbian couple and not even know it. Oh the horror of it.

        I wonder how he can sleep at night wondering about this and his obvious hypocrisy.

        1. Douglas –

          LOL! You are asking the wrong person.

          You’d have to ask Aaron about your suspicions and wonderings.

          As to the scenario you point out, there is no analogy. He’s somebody’s employee now and not joint owner of his own business. The hate-mongering lesbian activists and their complying judge and court, saw to that.

          1. Douglas says:

            LOL…..well I guess poor Aaron will just have to suck it up and collect everyone’s garbage whether he likes it or not. Sorry about that Aaron but I hope you’ve learned your lesson!

            If Aaron doesn’t like that, then he’ll just have to quit and have no job at all.

  3. Steve says:

    Discrimination is against the law. Period. If you decide to discriminate and call it “free speech,” then you have to be prepared to face legal consequences. Obviously, you have never run your own business, Pastor. When your doors are open to the public, you can be sued for refusing to serve an a paying customer. You cannot pick and choose whom you will serve. That is the LAW.

    You can’t scream and cry about the First Amendment in a case like this one. It just doesn’t apply.

    Commenter Douglas (above) is right:

    When the baker refused service to the two ladies, the baker should have immediately closed up the shop and campaigned to change the Law.

    1. Steve –

      You are mistaken. I was in business during my life’s period of gainful employment And, I refused some jobs even though I was requested for an estimate and the the people desired me to do the work.

      I assume that you also read my reply to Douglas. Yet you evade those objecting reasons.

      Sorry, you fail to convince me with your line of reasoning. Discrimination portends proof. There was no evidence of the bakery owners ill-will towards these activist lesbians. And, the bakery (as I understand) sold baked goods to all people, regardless of sexual orientation. And, the court failed to evidence the damage which the lesbians claimed. Also, if I am not mistaken, the court did not evidence that these two ladies were lesbians.

      A parrot owner could train his pet parrot to request a cake. Train the bird to say: “Bake me a cake!” I suppose if the bakery owner laughed and ignored the bird and did business with the people customers in his store – then, accordingly, the parrot’s owner could bring lawsuit against the bakery?

      1. Douglas says:

        The bakery owner made a big mistake. She should never have brought up the issue of a ”same sex” marriage or repeated it. The bakery owner should have just declined to make the cake by saying she was just too busy.

        When I was in business I refused several commissions because I did not have the time. We should all just leave the sticky issues of sex, religion and politics out of our business dealings.

        1. Douglas –

          It was early the next week following the Friday SCOTUS opinion that I gave my chaplain friend a phone call. I disguised my voice and ask him to officiate for a same sex wedding. I then ask him if he would officiate for my pets. Of course, he knew by the phone number who it was calling. He let me joke without interrupting.

          When I was done with my joking, we talked. He told me that between that Friday and when I called him, he had one and a half dozen phone calls requesting his marriage officiating services. He’s a busy pastor and did not have the time to schedule these anonymous individuals. Why don’t they call city hall? Why don’t these people schedule their civil ceremony with a justice of the peace? To me it is obvious. Some of them just want to make other people’s lives miserable. They want to bully. They want to inflict pain and suffering. They want to molest other people’s well-being.

  4. Ben says:

    These bakers broke the law. Period. The fact that they continue to put themselves out there as victims of persecution makes me think that they are part of a psychological operation. They may have been set up as a fake Christian couple who would be sued by lesbians. It could be that this is a 100% fake story that has been perpetrated on the public in an effort to highlight the idea that anyone who refuses to serve a member of a protected group can and will be sued.

    1. Ben –

      I like your comment. I think there is much merit to it.

      Also, because the judge was not reasonable in dispensing justice. As I stated in one or two of my previous comment replies, there was lacking a clear motive of ill-will against the 2 squawking lesbian activists who did not evidence before the court their (claimed) injury; or that they were, indeed, lesbian. [Which, of course, adds and lends itself to the real possibility of a contrived false reality event]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *