Tag: Pink Dot

  • How Singapore Is Limiting Basic Human Rights

    How Singapore Is Limiting Basic Human Rights

    Kenneth Chee and Gary Lim have been together for almost two decades, but in the eyes of the law they’re criminals.

    The couple met by chance at a shopping mall in Singapore in 1997. “I guess my ‘gaydar’ went off,” Chee recalls. “I just went up to him and asked him for his number.” They’ve been inseparable ever since.

    “If gay marriage was legal here, we would get married in a heartbeat,” Lim says. Chee, by his side, nods in agreement.

    But gay marriage is not legal in Singapore. Same-sex civil partnerships are also not recognized, and there are no laws that protect against discrimination on the grounds of gender expression or sexual orientation.

    In 2007, Singapore, which is a former British colony, made headlines when it struck colonial-era penal code Section 377 from its books. The statute had criminalized “carnal intercourse … against the order of nature,” which included anal and oral sex. The law, which dates back to 1860 and was exported to many British colonies, is still in place in several countries, including India, Malaysia and Myanmar. The statute has been called “England’s least lovely law export.”

    Though 377 was removed, a related provision — called Section 377A — was kept intact. 377A specifically targets sexual acts between two men. Under this law, homosexuality is criminalized and punishable by imprisonment of up to two years.

    The LGBT community in Singapore was incensed. Lim and Chee, who are both graphic designers, say they were shocked.

    “Why are we being singled out to be punished? It’s legal for straight people to have anal sex and oral sex, so why are we seen as criminals?” Lim says. “This law is now always hanging over our heads.”

    Outraged by the “blatant discrimination,” the couple decided to challenge the state in court — a decidedly unusual move.

    “I just refused to accept this nonsensical label,” Chee says. “We didn’t want to be seen as ‘illegal.’”

    In 2010, a Singaporean man named Tan Eng Hong was charged under 377A for having oral sex with another man in a public restroom. At the time, Tan challenged the constitutionality of the law. Two years later, Lim and Chee raised a second challenge.

    This was the first time in Singapore’s modern history that the constitutionality of a law was being challenged, according to the couple’s attorney, Peter Low.

    Last October, the final ruling for the case was delivered after several years of bouncing through the courts. Singapore’s Court of Appeal, the nation’s highest court, determined that 377A is constitutional.

    Homosexuality remains illegal in Singapore.

    “We were very disappointed,” Lim says, his lips pursing grimly. “The message was loud and clear: We’re not ready for change.”

    Singapore’s government has repeatedly said that it will not “proactively enforce” Section 377A. (In the case of Tan Eng Hong, the charge against him was later changed to “committing an obscene act in a public place.”) But Jean Chong, co-founder of LGBT rights group Sayoni, says the law — whether enforced or not — has had a profound effect on the country’s LGBT community, and on human rights in general.

    “377A may be targeted at men, but it has a cascading effect. It shapes public opinion, and informs policy. It impacts the entire LGBT community,” she says.

    Scott Teng, a 30-year-old gay man, points out that the government’s stance on the law is akin to “holding a gun to a person’s head, but saying, ‘oh, we’ll never pull the trigger.’ That’s the case here. You always wonder — at what point will the trigger be pulled?”

    Such a law, he adds, can encourage marginalization.

    “It gives people the justification to treat you as a lesser Singaporean, as a lesser human being,” Teng, who is an associate director at a brand consultancy, says. “It filters down to individual experiences, to the hurtful words people choose to use.”

    <span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">“When I first came out to my mother, it went horribly,” said Scott Teng. “My family’s very traditional, and the first reaction I got was ‘Get out of my house, you devil spawn!’ She took it very hard. But though it took her a few months, she’s accepted it and now she’s honestly the best mom ever. She told me, ‘Even if the sky falls down, mom will be here for you.”</span>SEAN LEE“When I first came out to my mother, it went horribly,” said Scott Teng. “My family’s very traditional, and the first reaction I got was ‘Get out of my house, you devil spawn!’ She took it very hard. But though it took her a few months, she’s accepted it and now she’s honestly the best mom ever. She told me, ‘Even if the sky falls down, mom will be here for you.”

     

    Sayoni has been documenting cases of violence and discrimination against Singapore’s LGBT community for several years.

    Most abuse is underreported Chong says, and she’s been “shocked” by many of the stories she’s heard.

    “Transgender women and gay women spoke about being assaulted, sometimes sexually, because of their appearance,” she says. “One trans woman said she was gang-raped at a hotel room, but she didn’t report it to the police. She’s trans and she used to do sex work, so she didn’t feel comfortable.”

    Chong says that the poor and the under-educated are particularly vulnerable to abuse. “They have less vocabulary to articulate what’s happening to them and they have fewer resources,” she says. These are individuals who don’t have access to the growing, though still small, LGBT community here.

    <span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">Avin Tan, 30, is a gay man living with HIV. According to Tan, there have only been two gay people with HIV who have come out publicly in Singapore about their condition. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUFLLOQFJv4">Paddy Chew</a>, who died in 1999 from HIV-related complications, was the first. Tan is the second. “More people need to come out. It takes guts and yes, it’s a risk, but we need people from every walk of life to speak up,” he said. “Only then will we see change.” </span>Avin Tan, 30, is a gay man living with HIV. According to Tan, there have only been two gay people with HIV who have come out publicly in Singapore about their condition. Paddy Chew, who died in 1999 from HIV-related complications, was the first. Tan is the second. “More people need to come out. It takes guts and yes, it’s a risk, but we need people from every walk of life to speak up,” he said. “Only then will we see change.” 

     

    The first gay protagonist in a local TV series featured in a 2003 docu-drama called “Crunchtime,” which was aired on Singapore’s Channel U. It was a landmark moment, but the series, supposedly based on a true story, was criticized for promoting homophobia.

    A subsequent exhibition about the history of Singaporean television, suggested that homosexuality was depicted as a mental illness in the show. The protagonist, named Shaohua, is seen visiting a counseling service in an effort to find the “correct and normal” path. By the end of the series, Shaohua is happily married to a woman, with whom he has a son.

    Storylines like this aren’t unique in Singapore.

    “A happy LGBT character, who has a good job or family support, isn’t allowed on Singaporean television,” LGBT activist and corporate attorney Paerin Choa says. “They have to be sad, troubled, or suicidal. In Chinese dramas, the gay character is often a serial killer or a comical sidekick.”

    The “promotion or glamorization of the homosexual lifestyle” is not allowed on television or in radio broadcasts, according to guidelines established by Singapore’s Media Development Authority.

    “Information, themes or subplots on lifestyles such as homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexualism, transsexualism, transvestism, pedophilia and incest should be treated with utmost caution,” the guidelines state. “Their treatment should not in any way promote, justify or glamorize such lifestyles.”

    MDA also noted that “music associated with drugs, alternative lifestyles (such as homosexuality) or the worship of the occult or the devil” should not be broadcast.

    Activists say that media restrictions like these have impacted their ability to organize and advocate.

    More than 50 percent of the 6,000 people who have been diagnosed with HIV in Singapore are gay men, yet, “because of the media law, we cannot run LGBT-specific campaigns,” Avin Tan, the head of advocacy and partnerships at Action for AIDS Singapore, the only organization in the country dedicated solely to HIV/AIDS awareness, treatment and prevention, tells HuffPost.

    “We can’t even run condom ads” on mainstream media, he adds. “We have to rely on putting posters up in clubs or using social media. We end up only reaching 10 percent of the community.”

    Tan, who lives with HIV, says that these restrictions aren’t just frustrating for advocates, but are potentially fatal for vulnerable individuals who are not being reached.

    “For every person who is diagnosed, one is not,” Tan says, quoting an as-yet unpublished AFA study. “One of the greatest challenges right now when it comes to HIV/AIDS is a serious lack of access to information.”

    <span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">Later this year, 32-year-old Ching S. Sia, a PhD student in architecture at the National University of Singapore, will be going to Australia to freeze her eggs. “Since young, I’ve always thought that I want to have a family one day,” she said. “As a gay woman, I want the option of having a kid when I want to.”</span>Later this year, 32-year-old Ching S. Sia, a PhD student in architecture at the National University of Singapore, will be going to Australia to freeze her eggs. “Since young, I’ve always thought that I want to have a family one day,” she said. “As a gay woman, I want the option of having a kid when I want to.”

    But for all the obstacles facing the country’s LGBT community, “there has been positive change,” according to Lynette Chua, an assistant law professor at the National University of Singapore and the author of Mobilizing Gay Singapore.

    “As a scholar, if you solely study outcomes and if your main concern is what laws on the books have been changed, then you’d say activism in Singapore has not been successful,” Chua says. “But if you look at other outcomes, at what’s happening on the ground, there definitely has been progress.”

    LGBT activism has a 25-year history in the country. The movement emerged in the early 1990s with small community groups, according to Chua. It was only a few years ago, however, that local activism gained real momentum. In 2009, Singapore’s first public gay pride event — the annual Pink Dot — was launched, and Sayoni was founded in 2012.

    The size of the LGBT movement has ballooned in the last decade, Chua says, “and young people are coming out earlier.” There are more activists than ever before and the government has shown “an increased willingness to acknowledge the existence of gay activism.”

    <span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">“Even as recently as 2009, the word ‘gay’ was very taboo. It wasn’t used in the media, it wasn’t often used in public. LGBT event were held behind closed doors. People were scared of being outed, of losing their jobs, that their families would find out. But that’s slowly changing,” said Pink Dot spokesperson Paerin Choa. </span>“Even as recently as 2009, the word ‘gay’ was very taboo. It wasn’t used in the media, it wasn’t often used in public. LGBT event were held behind closed doors. People were scared of being outed, of losing their jobs, that their families would find out. But that’s slowly changing,” said Pink Dot spokesperson Paerin Choa. 

    Indeed, when speaking to some members of the community, there is a tangible uniting sentiment: hope.

    “When I was younger, ‘gay’ was such a disgusting word to me,” Teng says. “I had trouble even saying it. There wasn’t a sense of pride associated with the term at all. Instead the negative power of the word made me question if I even wanted to be called that.”

    But the situation, he says, has “changed significantly.”

    “Now being gay is associated with a lot of positive attributes. There’s a better narrative attached. There were no gay role models when I was a kid, but that’s changed too,” Teng says.

    In recent years, a handful of local celebrities have come out. Kumar, a prominent comedian, revealed that he was gay in 2011 after years of being in denial. Last year, local actor and theater director Ivan Heng announced in a moving Facebook post that he had married his longtime partner in a ceremony in the U.K.

    Paerin Choa, the spokesperson for Pink Dot, says that the LGBT community has grown “more fearless.” The younger generation is “not so frightened or constrained by societal norms.”

    “Just look at Pink Dot’s numbers,” Choa says. “In 2009, the first year it was held, 2,500 people showed up. The following year, we had 4,000. In 2015, we had 28,000 people.”

    (Pink Dot has had its share of challenges, however, as conservative Christian and Muslim groups have called for believers to oppose the event.)

    Progress has been visible in other ways too.

    Christopher Khor, a 24-year-old transgender filmmaker, is releasing next year what promises to be a groundbreaking documentary about Singapore’s trans community.

    “When we started making this film, there was absolutely nothing, no exposure for the community. I was the first trans person that I knew,” Khor says, his face breaking into a smile. “We hope this film will start to challenge the idea of trans as ‘other.’”

    As for the future of Section 377A, both legal experts and activists tell HuffPost that it’s unlikely the statute will be removed anytime soon. “Not in my lifetime anyway,” attorney Peter Low says.

    Activists say that there’s plenty of work to be done before that goal can be reached.

    “It’s going to be a long fight,” Chong says. “Activists must work the ground and it’s going to take a long, long time. Look at the U.S. How did they win gay marriage? Activists worked the ground for years, they knocked on doors, they educated people, they worked so hard. You need resources, you need tenacity and you need the commitment to slog it out for 10 to 20 years. You need to not give up, and yes, it’s going to be hard.”

    Lim and Chee say they’re crossing their fingers that they’ll be around to see the needle shift.

    “It took the U.S. 40 to 50 years to get where they are. We’re heading in the right direction, it’s just a matter of when,” Lim says. “I wouldn’t mind being 80 and getting married. I’d do it.”

    Singapore-based photographer Sean Lee captured many of the portraits featured in this article. See more of his work here.

     

    Source: www.huffingtonpost.com

  • Male Cosmetic Doctor Charged With Molest Of Male Patient

    Male Cosmetic Doctor Charged With Molest Of Male Patient

    A cosmetic doctor allegedly molested a male liposuction patient three times – twice after injecting him with stupefying drugs in a hotel room, where he had taken him to “recuperate”, a court heard yesterday.

    Tan Kok Leong, 49, went on trial accused of three charges of outraging the modesty of a 33-year-old Malaysian doctor, who cannot be named due to a gag order. He faces another two of administering drugs so that he could molest him.

    The court heard that he first touched the fellow doctor’s genitals during a liposuction procedure on his waist at Life Source Medical Centre at Novena Medical Centre on June 6, 2013.

    On July 5 that year, he performed another liposuction procedure on the man at the clinic and then told him that he had booked a room for him at the nearby Oasia Hotel, where he could rest afterwards.

    In an agreed statement of facts, Deputy Public Prosecutor Victor Lim said that when the pair got there, Tan told his patient he would inject him with the sleeping drug Dormicum and painkiller Rosiden.

    Tan then allegedly pulled down the other doctor’s shorts and took photographs of his genitals.

    Both men stayed at the hotel the next day, when Tan allegedly repeated the two offences.

    The defence argued that the complainant could not have been molested during the June 6 liposuction as his girlfriend, also a doctor, was present along with another doctor.

    Lawyers Edmond Pereira and Vickie Tan said the complainant was fully awake during the procedure and had consented to the photos being taken at the hotel.

    Tan was a partner at Life Source Medical Practice, which has since closed, and was licensed to perform liposuction.

    The maximum punishment for outrage of modesty is two years’ jail, a fine and caning. For administering of stupefying drugs, the maximum is 10 years’ jail and caning.

    The hearing continues.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • What Does Islam Say About Being Gay?

    What Does Islam Say About Being Gay?

    ISTANBUL — On June 29, Turkey’s 12th Gay Pride Parade was held on Istanbul’s crowded Istiklal Avenue. Thousands marched joyfully carrying rainbow flags until the police began dispersing them with water cannons. The authorities, as has become their custom since the Gezi Park protests of June 2013, once again decided not to allow a demonstration by secular Turks who don’t fit into their vision of the ideal citizen.

    More worrying news came a week later when posters were put up in Ankara with a chilling instruction: “If you see those carrying out the People of Lot’s dirty work, kill the doer and the done!” The “People of Lot” was a religious reference to gays, and the instruction to kill them on sight was attributed to the Prophet Muhammad. The group that put the posters up, the so-called Islamic Defense Youth, defended its message by asserting: “What? Are you offended by the words of our prophet?!”

    All of this suggests that both Turkey and the Muslim world need to engage in some soul-searching when it comes to tolerance for their gay compatriots.

    Of course this intolerance is not exclusive to either Turks or Muslims. According to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, Turkey scores slightly better on measures of gay rights when compared with some nearby Christian-majority nations such as Russia, Armenia and Ukraine. Indeed, Turkey’s secular laws don’t penalize sexual orientation, and some out-of-the-closet L.G.B.T. icons have long been popular as artists, singers or fashion designers. Among them are two of the most popular Turkish entertainers of the past half-century: The late Zeki Muren was flamboyantly gay and the singer Bulent Ersoy is famously transsexual. Their eccentricity has apparently added to their popularity.

    But beyond the entertainment industry, the traditional mainstream Islamic view on homosexuality produces intolerance in Turkey toward gays and creates starker problems in Muslim nations that apply Shariah. In Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan or Afghanistan, homosexuality is a serious offense that can bring imprisonment, corporal punishment or even the death penalty. Meanwhile, Islamic State militants implement the most extreme interpretation of Shariah by throwing gays from rooftops.

    At the heart of the Islamic view on homosexuality lies the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is narrated in the Quran, too. According to scripture, the Prophet Lot had warned his people of “immorality,” for they did “approach men with desire, instead of women.” In return, the people warned by Lot tried to expel their prophet from the city, and even tried to sexually abuse the angels who came down to Lot in the guise of men. Consequently, God destroyed the people of Lot with a colossal natural disaster, only to save the prophet and a few fellow believers.

    The average conservative Muslim takes this story as a justification to stigmatize gays, but there is an important question that deserves consideration: Did the people of Lot receive divine punishment for being homosexual, or for attacking Lot and his heavenly guests?

    The even more significant nuance is that while the Quran narrates this divine punishment for Sodom and Gomorrah, it decrees no earthly punishment for homosexuality — unlike the Old Testament, which clearly decrees that homosexuals “are to be put to death.”

    Medieval Islamic thinkers inferred an earthly punishment by considering homosexuality as a form of adultery. But significant names among them, such as the eighth-century scholar Abu Hanifa, the founder of the popular Hanafi school of jurisprudence, argued that since a homosexual relationship did not produce offspring with an unknown father, it couldn’t be considered adultery.

    The real Islamic basis for punishing homosexuality is the hadiths, or sayings, attributed to the Prophet Muhammad. (The same is true for punishments on apostasy, heresy, impiety, or “insults” of Islam: None come from the Quran; all are from certain hadiths.) But the hadiths were written down almost two centuries after the prophet lived, and their authenticity has been repeatedly questioned — as early as the ninth century by the scholar Imam Nesai — and they can be questioned anew today. Moreover, there is no record of the prophet actually having anyone punished for homosexuality.

    Such jurisprudential facts might help Muslims today to develop a more tolerant attitude toward gays, as some progressive Islamic thinkers in Turkey, such as Ihsan Eliacik, are encouraging. What is condemned in the story of Lot is not sexual orientation, according to Mr. Eliacik, but sexual aggression. People’s private lives are their own business, he argues, whereas the public Muslim stance should be to defend gays when they are persecuted or discriminated against — because Islam stands with the downtrodden.

    It is also worth recalling that the Ottoman Caliphate, which ruled the Sunni Muslim world for centuries and which the current Turkish government claims to emulate, was much more open-minded on this issue. Indeed, the Ottoman Empire had an extensive literature of homosexual romance, and an accepted social category of transvestites. The Ottoman sultans, arguably, were social liberals compared with the contemporary Islamists of Turkey, let alone the Arab World.

    Despite such arguments, the majority of Muslims are likely to keep seeing homosexuality as something sinful, if public opinion polls are any indication. Yet those Muslims who insist on condemning gays should recall that according to Islam, there are many sins, including arrogance, which the Quran treats as among the gravest moral transgressions. For Turks and other Muslims, it could be our own escape from the sin of arrogance to stop stigmatizing others for their behavior and focus instead on refining ourselves.

    The writer, Mustafa Akyol, is the author of “Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty.”

    Source: www.nytimes.com

  • Gay Couple Vow Not To Leave Thailand Without Surrogate Baby

    Gay Couple Vow Not To Leave Thailand Without Surrogate Baby

    BANGKOK – A foreign same-sex couple Monday vowed not to leave Thailand without their daughter after a local surrogate mother rescinded permission for them to take the baby she gave birth to.

    Gordon Lake, an American, and his Spanish husband, Manuel Valero, say the woman decided not to let them leave the kingdom with their daughter Carmen after she discovered the couple were gay.

    The dispute has revived tensions in Thailand over its controversial reputation for once being a thriving international surrogacy hub.

    The couple, who have a surrogate son born in India, are currently caring for Carmen in Bangkok, but have not been given the necessary paperwork to leave the country with her.

    The woman, who has only been identified by her family nickname “Oy”, insists her refusal to sign the release papers has nothing to do with the couple’s sexual orientation.

    Lake, who lives with his husband in Valencia, Spain, fought back tears in an emotional television interview in which he pleaded with the surrogate mother to change her mind.

    “She’s our daughter, we’ll be here as long as we need to be. We’re not leaving Thailand without our daughter,” he told Channel 3.

    “From the very beginning we’ve wanted to solve this peacefully. We want her to be involved in her life. We want to sit down and figure out how we solve this situation,” he added.

    For years Thailand boasted a lucrative – yet largely unregulated – international surrogacy trade which was particularly popular among gay couples.

    But in February legislation was passed banning foreigners from using Thai surrogates after a series of high-profile scandals.

    The move was spurred by an Australian couple who were accused last spring of abandoning a baby with Down’s syndrome carried by a Thai surrogate while taking his healthy twin sister.

    A second high profile surrogacy controversy erupted when nine babies fathered by a Japanese man using Thai surrogate mothers were discovered in a Bangkok apartment.

    As those scandals broke, Oy was already pregnant with Carmen.

    She carried the baby to term and handed her to Lake and Valero, but did not appear for an appointment at the US embassy to sign the final paperwork, leaving the couple stranded.

    Speaking anonymously to Channel 3 last week Oy said she had no issue with Lake and Valero being gay.

    “But I’m worried about the baby, her future and that she might fall into the hands of human traffickers,” she said, without further elaborating on those concerns.

    Lake told Channel 3 he and his husband had tried to hold a meeting with Oy on three occasions but she had backed out each time at the last minute.

    “We just want to talk to her… and find a way where she’ll be comfortable knowing we’re good parents and where she’ll be comfortable knowing Carmen is in a good family,” he said.

     

    Source: http://news.asiaone.com

  • Christian Bakers Who Declined To Make Cake For Gay Wedding Ordered To Pay $135,000 To Lesbian Couple

    Christian Bakers Who Declined To Make Cake For Gay Wedding Ordered To Pay $135,000 To Lesbian Couple

    GRESHAM, Ore. — The owners of a Christian bakery in Oregon have officially been ordered to pay $135,000 in damages to two lesbians who claimed that they suffered emotionally after they were told that the bakery could not make a cake for their ceremony because of their convictions not to participate in others’ sins.

    As previously reported, Aaron and Melissa Klein operate Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Gresham, which is now operated from the couple’s home after the Kleins’ shut their doors due to harassment. In January 2013, Aaron was approached by a mother and her daughter as the two were interested in a cake for the daughter’s upcoming wedding—to her lesbian partner.

    “My first question was what’s the wedding date,” Klein told television station KTW in Portland. “My next question was [the] bride and groom’s name. … The girl giggled a little bit and said, ‘It’s two brides.’”

    He then informed the women that the bakery does not make cakes for homosexual events.

    “I apologized for wasting their time and said that, unfortunately, we do not do same-sex marriages,” Klein explained.

    The women left Sweet Cakes upset about the incident, and later, one of them filed a complaint with the state. The Oregon attorney general’s office soon launched an investigation against the Klein’s as the state’s non-discrimination laws prevent public accommodations from being denied to any individual on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex [or] sexual orientation.”

    But Klein states that he regularly serves homosexuals. He believes that there is a difference between serving homosexuals in general and having to personally facilitate same-sex ceremonies, which is an act of participation.

    “I have customers come in almost on a weekly basis that are homosexual,” he said. “They can buy my stuff. I sell stuff. I talk with them. That’s fine. … This was not the first time we’ve served these girls.”

    “We were being asked to participate in something that we could not participate in,” Klein’s wife, Melissa, noted.

    Some Christians believe that being a part of a same-sex event violates the biblical command in 1 Timothy 5:22 not to be “partakers in other men’s sins,” as well as the command in Ephesians 5:7, “Be not ye therefore partakers with them.”

    In February, a judge with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled that the Christian bakers are guilty of discrimination for declining to make the cake, thus moving the matter into the sentencing phase. The Kleins had expressed concern prior to the ruling that if they were forced to pay a fine for declining the cake over their Christian convictions, the penalty would “definitely” bankrupt the family.

    In April, Alan McCullough, an administrative judge with the bureau, recommended a fine of $135,000, with one of the women receiving $75,000 and the other $60,000. Prosecutors had sought damages of $75,000 each.

    The two women, who have been identified as Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, submitted individual lists of just under 100 aspects of suffering in order to receive the damages. They included “acute loss of confidence,” “doubt,” “distrust of men,” “distrust of former friends,” “excessive sleep,” “discomfort,” “high blood pressure,” “impaired digestion,” “loss of appetite,” “migraine headaches,” “loss of pride,” “mental rape,” “resumption of smoking habit,” “shock” “stunned,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “weight gain” and “worry.”

    But the Kleins told the court that they too had suffered because of the attacks that they received over their desire to live out their Christian faith in the workplace. They stated that they endured “mafia tactics” as their car was vandalized and broken into on two occasions, their vendors were harassed by homosexual advocates resulting in some businesses breaking ties with them, and they received threatening emails wishing rape, death and Hell upon the family. As a result, they had to close their business and move it into their private home.

    This week, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries accepted McCollough’s recommendation and fined the Kleins $135,000.

    “This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage,” the final order, written by Commissioner Brad Avakian, read. “It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.”

    The Kleins told commentator Todd Starnes that they are disappointed by the order and plan to appeal.

    “We were just running our business the best we could—following the Lord’s example,” Melissa Kelin stated. “I’m just blown away by the ruling. They are punishing us for not participating in the wedding.”

    Aaron Klein vowed to fight Avakian in court.

    “This man has no power over me,” he said. “He seems to think he can tell me to be quiet. That doesn’t sit well with me and I refuse to comply.”

    Sweet Cakes by Melissa had served Cryer and Bowman for all other orders at their bakery, and even considered the women to be their friends.

    Source: http://christiannews.net