Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The FAQs: Christian Bakers Face $135k Fine and Gag Order Over Wedding Cake for Same-Sex Couple
The FAQs: Christian Bakers Face $135k Fine and Gag Order Over Wedding Cake for Same-Sex Couple
Jan 21, 2026 10:49 PM

What is the case about?

In 2013, a lesbian couple went into Sweet Cakes, a bakery in Oregon, to order a “wedding cake” for their mitment ceremony. When the couple told the baker, Aaron Klein that it was for a same-sex ceremony, he told them he would serve homosexuals but that his religious beliefs would not allow him to participate by creating the cake for them. The couple filed plaint with the Oregon Labor Commission, claiming Sweet Cakes and the Kleins discriminated against them because of their sexual orientation.

Last week, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian finalized a preliminary ruling ordering Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in emotional damages to the couple they denied service.

“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation,” said Avakian, a political appointee. In his ruling he notes he finds “no distinction” between refusing to serve a same-sex wedding and discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation.

“[Aaron Klein]denied the full and equal modation, advantages, facilities and privileges of Sweet Cakes by Melissa to Complainants based on their sexual orientation thereby violating ORS 659A.403,” claims the ruling.

How much were the Kleins ordered to pay the couple?

The Commissioner awarded the lesbian couple $135,000 in “damages for emotional and mental suffering resulting from the denial of service.”

What were the claims of emotional and mental suffering?

The lesbian couple claims they suffered extensive emotional and mental suffering because they were discriminated against for their sexual orientation and because of the public attention it generated (attention which was brought about by their filing a plaint).

The couple listed several dozen examples of “emotional and mental suffering” including: “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.”

No doctor, counselor, or psychiatrist confirmed any of these symptoms. missioner merely accepted these claims at face value even though his own ruling stated that Laurel Bowman-Cryer was frequently an unreliable witness:

[Laurel Bowman-Cryer] was a very bitter and angry witness who had a strong tendency to exaggerate and over-dramatize events. On cross examination, she argued repeatedly with Respondents’ counsel and had to be counseled by ALJ to answer the questions asked of her instead of editorializing about the denial of service and how it affected her. Her testimony was inconsistent in several respects with more credible evidence.

What was the basis of the claims of emotional and mental suffering?

The Bowman-Cryers claimed distress both because of the discrimination and because of the attention they received because of their plaint.

The couple filled out an Oregon Department of Justice Consumer Complaint Form against the Kleins and Sweet Cakes by Melissa which clearly stated the information would e part of the public record and be released to the business and persons it was about. Aaron Klein posted plaint on her Facebook page (at the time he only had 17 “friends” on his page). The Bowman-Cryers contacted their lawyer who asked Aaron Klein to take it down, which he did.

The Bowman-Cryers lawyer then sent a letter to several media sources asking that the lesbian couple’s name not be used in any news reports.

However, after an LGBT protest outside the bakery, the couple thanked the protestors on the Facebook page called “BoycottSweetCakesByMelissaGRESHAM” and indirectly identified themselves as the couple involved.

Did the Commissioner order a “gag order” on the Kleins?

A gag order (also known as a gagging order or suppression order) is an order by a court or government restricting information ment from being made public. The Commissioner did order a “gag order” by ordering the Kleins to cease and desist violating ORS 659A.403 and 659A.409.

The relevant portions of ORS 659A.403 merely state that everyone in Oregon is “entitled to the full and equal modations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public modation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account … sexual orientation…” However, ORS 659A.403 states that it is an unlawful practice for any person “acting on behalf of any place of public modation” to “publish, circulate, issue or display, or cause to be published, circulated, issued or displayed, munication, notice, advertisement or sign of any kind to the effect that any of the modations, advantages, facilities, services or privileges of the place of public modation will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination will be made against, any person on account of . . . sexual orientation . . .”

In an interview with Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, the Kleins explained why they could not bake the cake for the couple and they “don’t do same-sex marriage, same-sex wedding cakes.” This was presented as evidence of the Klein’s future intent to violate 659A.403.

Because of this interpretation of the law, the missioner is requiring that the Kleins cease-and-desist from claiming that they will not provide services for same-sex weddings, either in their store or in public.

In much of mentary on this ruling, especially on social media, there has been some confusion about the scope of the cease and desist order that was issued. The Kleins still retain their right to speak to the media and to express their opinion about homosexuality and same-sex marriage provided that they do not mention they will continue to refuse services for same-sex weddings or speak about the subject “on behalf” of their business.

The Kleins, however, consider this to be an illegitimate restriction since they are not discriminating based on sexual orientation but are merely refusing to participate in a civil ceremony and “celebration” that violates their religious beliefs.

What happens next for the Kleins?

The Kleins have 10 days to file exceptions to the proposed order, and one of their attorneys has already pledged to contest the $135,000 damages award. On the Sweet Cakes by Melissa Facebook page, the Kleins wrote:

The final ruling has been made today. We have been charged with $135,000 in emotional damages, But also now Aaron has been charged with advertising. (Basically talking about not wanting to participate in a same-sex wedding) This effectively strips us of all our first amendment rights. According to the state of Oregon we neither have freedom of religion or freedom of speech. We will NOT give up this fight, and we will NOT be silenced. We stand for God’s truth, God’s word and freedom for ALL Americans. We are here to obey God not man, and we will not conform to this world. If we were to lose everything it would be totally worth it for our Lord who gave his one and only son, Jesus, for us! God will win this fight!

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
A Lesson from Michigan: Time to End Crony Unionism
In this week’s Acton Commentary, I take a look at the prospects of “right-to-work” legislation in Michigan, “A Lesson from Michigan: Time to End Crony Unionism.” One of the things that disturbs me the most about what I call “crony unionism” is the hand-in-glove relationship between the labor unions and big government. We have the same kind of special pleading and rent seeking in this system as we do in crony capitalism, but the labor unions enjoy such special protection...
Mandating Monolithic Medicine
Among the warnings sounded as the Democratic health care reform bill was being debated was that the federal insurance mandate included in the bill—even though not national health care per se—would essentially give the federal government control of the insurance industry. The reason: If everyone is forced to buy insurance, then the government must deem what sort of insurance qualifies as adequate to meet the mandate. This piece of Obamacare promises to turn every medical procedure into a major political...
The Politics of Crony Unionism
Last week’s Acton Commentary and blog post focused on my claims about “crony unionism” and how the intimate relationship between Big Labor and Big Government corrupt both. Here’s another instance of the kinds of gross conflicts of interest produced by this relationship: It’s hard to see this as anything but partisan pandering on the part of the largest public sector union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Meanwhile, the Washington Post asks, “Was politics behind the...
Journal of Religion and Business Ethics
The latest issue of the newly launched Journal of Religion and Business Ethics is now available (vol. 1, no. 2). Check out the contents at their website. From the journal’s about page: “The Journal of Religion and Business Ethics is a peer-reviewed journal that examines the ethical and religious issues that arise in the modern business setting. While much attention has been given to the philosophical treatment of business ethics, this is the first journal to address the more inclusive...
Envy: A Deadly (Economic) Sin
Victor Claar, Acton University lecturer and professor of economics at Henderson State University, will give a talk tonight in Washington, D.C., hosted by AEI, “Grieving the Good of Others: Envy and Economics.” If you are in the area, you are encouraged to attend and hear Dr. Claar as well as two respondents discuss the topic of envy and its moral and economic consequences. Here’s a description of the event: Critics of capitalism often argue that this economic system is irretrievably...
Radio Free Acton: The Stewardship of Art, Part 2
Last week, we posted part 1 of our podcast on the proper Christian stewardship of art; for those who have been waiting for the conclusion, we’re happy to present part 2. David Michael Phelps continues to lead the discussion between Professors Nathan Jacobs and Calvin Seerveld, who previously debated this topic in the Controversy section of our Journal of Markets & Morality. The first portion of that exchange is available at the link for part 1; the remainder of the...
The Daily Show Takes on a Union
The Daily Show exposes some union hypocrisy (HT). In the words of the union local head, es down to greed”: ...
Rev. Sirico: Respect others’ rights, but also their values
A new column by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, president and co-founder of the Acton Institute, was published today in the Detroit News. This column will also be linked in tomorrow’s Acton News & Commentary. Sign up for the free weekly Acton newsletter here. +++++++++ Faith and policy: Respect others’ rights, but also their values FATHER ROBERT SIRICO If such an award were to be given for the Most Contentious Religious Story of 2010, the two main contenders would undoubtedly be...
Work as if It Mattered
The conversations over the last few weeks here on work have raised a couple of questions. In the context of criticisms on the perspectives on work articulated by Lester DeKoster and defended by menter John E. asks, “…what is it that you hope readers will change in their lives, and why?” I want to change people’s view of their work. I want them to see how it has value not simply as a means to some other end, but in...
Explaining the New Democratic Logo
“The new Democratic logo is so bad that the intellectual rot in the official announcement went largely unnoticed.” The rest of my piece is here at The American Spectator. ...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved