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 14, 2026 1:15 AM

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
The Parenting Class
Along the same lines as my earlier post, The Weekly Standard argues that putting the needs of parents first, can form a more stable foundation for an alliance between fiscal and social conservatives. Both fiscal and social conservatives should put themselves in the shoes of the parenting class and focus on petition and choice while also encouraging the growth and strength of the two-parent family. In health care, for instance, conservatives have consistently failed to approach things from that point...
Natural Law and Christian Social Thought
Two new and intriguing books from Cambridge University Press have crossed my editorial desk recently. Anticipate reviews to appear in the Journal of Markets & Morality sometime next year; but in the meantime I wanted to give them each a plug. Both draw on the philosophical tradition of the natural law to address contemporary debates in social/political thought. The argument of Christopher Wolfe’s Natural Law Liberalism is summed up in a blurb by Notre Dame law professor Gerard Bradley: “No...
Wait – You Mean Taxpayers DON’T Have to Pay for Stadiums?
Refreshing news from Major League Baseball: In the interest of full disclosure, I have to say, I have loved the Oakland Athletics for a long time now. I love how they are the anti-Yankees, consistently fielding winning teams despite having one of the lower payrolls in the game, and losing superstar after superstar to richer teams. I love their plucky spirit and their annual belief-defying August winning streaks. I love Billy Beane’s flair for the dramatic. I love that they...
Immigration Policy and the Future of Free Market
I have been quite concerned for some time about the shrill debate over illegal immigration and its potential fallout for free trade. I have argued, at Acton events and elsewhere, that no long-term solution to the flow of illegal immigration from Mexico is possible, without significant economic growth in Mexico. U.S. per capita GDP is 6.5 times greater than the Mexican per capita GDP. The public service infrastructure in the US is far superior to that in Mexico. Taken together,...
The State Which Would Provide Everything
is the title of an insightful article by Fr. James Schall over at the Ignatius site. An analysis of the political contribution of Deus Caritas Est, Benedict XVI’s first encyclical, ments: The Second half of the encyclical is a brilliant treatise on the nature and limits of the State and what lies beyond it. "We do not need a state which regulates and controls everything," Benedict writes, "but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges...
Bonhoeffer on Church and State, Part 2
The following is the text of a paper presented on November 15, 2006 at the Evangelical Theological Society 58th Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, which was themed, “Christians in the Public Square.” Part 2 of 3 follows below (series index). Relationship between Church and State It must first be noted that Bonhoeffer’s conception of mandates was a statement about the ontological ordering of God’s rule in the world, not a particular statement about the precise form that rule would or...
A Thanksgiving Prayer
Almighty God, Father of all mercies, we thine unworthy servants do give thee most humble and hearty thanks for all thy goodness and loving-kindness to us and to all men. We bless thee for our creation, preservation, and all the blessings of this life; but above all for thine inestimable love in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ; for the means of grace, and for the hope of glory. And, we beseech thee, give us that...
Generous Conservatives
Desperate Philanthropist? In a recent column in the National Post, David Frum looks at an “astonishing” new book on charitable giving due out this month from Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks. In “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth of Compassionate Conservatism,” Brooks contends that conservatives are really “more generous, more honest and more public-spirited” than liberals. Frum starts his column with a quote from Desperate Housewives actress Eva Longoria, who asserts: “Everyone on Wisteria Lane has the money of...
Good News for the Moralists
Here’s some good news for those who prefer bat cultural evil through the edification and cultivation of moral sensibilities: In “Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets,” Alvin E. Roth finds that “distaste for certain kinds of transactions is a real constraint, every bit as real as the constraints imposed by technology or by the requirements of incentives and efficiency.” He also finds that “while repugnance can change over time, change can be quite slow.” This presumably applies to the decrease...
Bonhoeffer on Church and State, Part 3
The following is the text of a paper presented on November 15, 2006 at the Evangelical Theological Society 58th Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, which was themed, “Christians in the Public Square.” Part 3 of 3 follows below (series index). War and Peace I will conclude with a brief word about Bonhoeffer and pacifism, given the ongoing claims about Bonhoeffer’s mitment to the practice of nonviolence.[i] First, it should be noted, with Clifford J. Green, that it is invalid to...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved