Wednesday, June 03, 2015

Oregon Gov't. Colludes With LGBT Group Against Christians?

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Oregon government official Brad Avakian promised to make an example of Aaron and Mellisa Klein when they declined to bake a "wedding" cake for a lesbian couple.

Avakian followed through on his threat.

The Klien's small bakery, "Sweet Cakes by Melissa," is now shut down and the Christian couple face over $150,000 in so-called damages, including $135,000 to the lesbians.

This week we are learning there may be evidence that Avakian and his government agency that destroyed the Klein's business, and will likely bankrupt them personally, colluded with the pro-LGBT group Basic Rights Oregon during the proceedings---proceedings that are still under way.

The Daily Signal, an arm of the Heritage Foundation, has exclusively learned that the government agency responsible for enforcing Oregon's anti-discrimination law appears to be working closely with a powerful homosexual advocacy group, Basic Rights Oregon, in its case against Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of the now closed "Sweet Cakes by Melissa."

Communications between the agency, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries and Basic Rights raise questions about potential bias in the state's decision to charge the Kleins with discrimination.

While Kelsey Harkness with the Signal was not in the meetings, she has obtained email messages confirming that Avakian's Oregon State Labor Bureau met with Basic Rights Oregon on multiple occasions and purchased tickets costing hundred's of dollars benefiting the homosexual advocacy group.

Basic Rights Oregon in turn has contributed at least $8,000 to Avakian's bid for Commissioner.

On December 2, 2014, a Basic Rights Oregon employee wrote of Avakian, "His voice is really important as a coalition partner and a leader in Oregon politics."

The emails unearthed by Harkness show, not a contact, but many contacts--- a communication pattern between the state and the advocacy group, including multiple meetings.

On or around Oct. 7, 2014, Avakian himself accepted a phone call from Jeana Frazzini, co-director of Basic Rights Oregon fund raising activities.

There are multiple emails setting up and confirming meetings between the state and the advocacy group. Copies of them are included with this link.

All this while the case against the Kleins is still underway.

Conflict of interest.

Avakian will ultimately determine the amount of the fine, but in April, Administrative Judge Alan McCullough, who was appointed by Avakian, issued a "proposed order" for the case against the Kleins, recommending the Kleins pay $135,000 to the 2 lesbians because "the Kleins imposed mental, physical and emotional damages upon the lesbians" by declining to bake their cake.

Von Spakovsky with the Heritage Foundation says this is an example of the problem we have with "administrative law judges appointed by a government agency. It is by its nature an inherent conflict of interest."

Indeed. And when activism is driving the government agency, it is an obvious ethics violation. The activist government agency becomes judge, prosecutor, jury and executioner.

Welcome to the secular progressive's version of religious freedom.

An equally troubling issue is how Avakian's relationship with Basic Rights Oregon is manipulating the narrative of all this in the news media.

Charlie Burr, communication director for Avakian's Oregon Bureau, appears to have worked closely with the homosexual activists in shaping the media's narrative.

A basic Rights Oregon employee emailed Burr on January 31, 2015---immediately following McCullough's order---expressing interest in "hearing your plan regarding Sweet Cakes case."

On April 30, 2015, Burr forwarded a conversation to basic Rights Oregon between himself and an editorial board member for the Portland Oregonian newspaper---related to the Sweet Cakes by Melissa case--"FYI."

In the email, Burr is attempting to make clear to the editor that the final order was not an "opportunity" for Avakian to "show leadership" but rather, to make a decision "that best serves justice based on the unique facts of this case."

Perhaps the most troubling of this whole assault on religious liberty and freedom, at least to me, is this:

This case is now in what the Labor Commissioner Avakian calls the "period of reconciliation."

When this case became public more than a year ago, Avakian made clear what he believes "reconciliation" means.

He told the press, "Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn't mean that folks have the right to discriminate. The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate."

The State of Oregon's stated goal is "to rehabilitate" biblical Christians.

Aaron Klein said then and says now, "There will be no reconciliation and there will be no rehabilitation."

"There's nothing wrong with what we believe. It's a biblical point of view. It's my faith. It's my religion," he says.

It is extremely troubling that Government now rewards 2 lesbians with $135,000 for "mental, physical, and emotional damage" while bankrupting a Christian couple for simply declining to participate in something that violates their personal religious beliefs.

And they continue to call it "Equality."

Not only is Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian, and others across the nation who share his beliefs, trying to "rehabilitate" biblical Christians, he is also trying to send a message.

And the message to biblical Christians reads something like this: "Shut Up!"--- "Be Silent."

"Believe what you wish, but don't even consider talking about it publicly or living it out in your personal life."

"And if you do..."

God help us.


  1. the LGBT demands "Tolerance" of their decisions to lead the lifestyles they have chosen. It turns out that they are a, if not the most intolerant and vicious organization that will do all it can to force their chosen way of life on the rest of us. They use the lawsuits, outright death threats, and have advocated burning down business's that will not comply with their demands. What will be next ?? Will they start burning Bibles and Churches, and lynching Christians ??

  2. The burning and lynching has already begun.

  3. Gary, thanks for keeping the light on.

  4. We appreciate Faith and Freedom, and you Gary! Prayers up and support for the Kleins!

  5. This unconstitutional and illegal open discrimination against Christian businesses must stop! This is obviously an act of evil to rid the state of all Christian's religious liberties to some extent, and how far they will go, we really don't yet know! What they do to any of us, they have done against all Christians.

    Let's write 60 Minutes and ask them to do an informative investigation into this matter whenever we hear of this sort of thing happening. Let's also write governors and such who should be watching over our legal, God given rights.

    1. Good idea!!! - - Do it!!

  6. Emotional, physical, and emotional damage to the lesbians in this case, I assume to equal zero.

  7. What ever these people who threw themselves in with the gay agenda, are up to.... don't buy any of it.

  8. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah had homes that could have been valued at $135,000.

    If God ever did anything wrong..... I'm sure he will make it right......I'm just thinking that he never.... did anything wrong, is all.

  9. When I look into Genesis 18 and 19, I don't see no wedding cakes.

    1. Well....Abraham entertaining the Lord and the angels, they had cakes, but I didn't see nothing for any homosexuals. All they got was hell fire and brimstone from the sky.

    2. This kind of injustice can anger a man to .....? I don't know.

      Psalm 78:65,66. KJV

  10. The state is trying to turn the Church into Sodom and Gomorrah.

  11. If somebody came into a bakery and asked for a special cake for a baby sacrificing ceremony, if they would get a cake, or if the bakery would get sued for all it's worth, or if it's just certain people who get special rights, and on what basis does the state decide such things? Does it now go without a constitution or what?

  12. Kathy from Thorp3:59 PM, June 03, 2015

    The same thing is happening in Washington State to florist Barronelle Stutzman of Arlene's Flowers. She is facing possible complete ruin because our unscrupulous attorney general brought suit on behalf of a same-sex couple when Mrs. Stutzman refused to provide flowers for their wedding. Amazing indeed. A ruination of her private property and religious liberty rights as stipulated by the United States Constitution! Don't you just love those loving, tolerant progressives!

  13. Instead of the state being up to it's nonsense, I wish it would be up to the works of Gen 18:19 instead.

  14. You people are pathetic.....You sit here and complain in this forum yet do nothing about the wickedness engulfing your culture. Here in WA only 13% of the churches participated in the initiative to vote on Homosexual marriage and now we are the only state in the union that the people voted for and got this cancer...Your responsible I'm responsible. Until your ready to back someone that's willing to lead the fight were going to just drift to the bottom as cowards....Good luck salt of the earth.

  15. If these bakers did wedding cakes for heterosexuals which had two grooms or two brides on the cake, but refused to do the same for homosexuals, then maybe the state would have it's case.

  16. This has nothing at all to do with sexual orientation. It only is concerned with what marriage really is and what one's religious service to God, fellow man, and the community is. Doesn't the state know this?

  17. Let's suppose a heterosexual couple, a man and a woman came into that bakery and asked for a wedding cake for their wedding, and asked that it have two grooms on it, or two brides on it and the bakery refused, simply saying they don't do that kind of work, explaining to them that their name goes on their products and that the employees put their heart and soul into their work.

    If they went to the state and asked if they had a case to sue the bakery, what should we think the state would say about that?

    Would they say, "Why yes, we will back you 100% since this is clearly another unlawful act of discrimination based on ah....what? Sexual orientation?

    How could that be? It would not be legitimate. So we're back to special rights again are we not? This is exactly what this is, and it's contrary to common sense and the constitution.

    What ever happened to everyone being born with the same rights?

  18. Hard to believe the state wants to impose itself into the things of the Church and do a thing like this.

    EZ 22:26,27
    Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.
    Her princes in the midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls, to get dishonest gain.

  19. I wrote the governor of Washington a few messages about this sort of thing and used his site, but now I can not send any more e- messages on the governors site. It won't allow me to type anything in the message box. I can send a blank message is all. I wonder if I was blocked or something.

  20. Is it that we no longer have a constitutional state A/G now? And how about the governor?

    I suppose now in the eyes of the state, a Christian can no longer live out their faith in business matters since in the eyes of the state a business isn't recognized to have constitutional rights, or something like that.

    A Christian therefore must choose between his faith or his business, is that it?
    Can't have both, says the state now, is that it? Have they clearly lost their minds?

  21. Choose between your faith or everything you own, is that the state is saying?

    I think these people are paid way too much or something. Where is there accountability in this?

  22. I suppose we have to understand the state's position on this.....that a business is a business, is a business, and we must have non Christian businesses for our agenda.

  23. The state is very much against all forms of discrimination, are they not?

    They Are Not.

  24. By this, I think we should understand that special rights are those lawless ones that are given special priority over basic constitutional ones.


Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.