Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Custom Wedding Cake Legal Battle Continues

A California county superior court judge has ruled in favor of an anti-gay Christian baker who refused to sell a same-sex couple a custom wedding cake, citing her religious beliefs. Last August Cathy Miller, the owner of Tastries bakery told a couple she would not bake them a cake and referred them to another baker.

 

. . . . . In December Judge Lampe refused to grant California a temporary restraining order barring Miller from selling any item to a different-sex couple she would not sell to a same-sex couple.

 

"The difference here is that the cake is not yet baked," Judge Lampe wrote in his decision Monday. "The state is not petitioning the court to order defendants to sell a cake. The state asks this court to compel Miller to use her talents to design and create a cake she has not yet conceived with the knowledge that her work will be displayed in celebration of a marital union her religion forbids. For this court to force such compliance would do violence to the essentials of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment."

 

New Civil Rights Movement - Pre-Made Wedding Cakes vs Custom Cakes for Same Sex Couple Couples

 

read more at the link -

 

Guess the SCOTUS needs to hurry with their decision - expected in June.

465 Views
155
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@GailL1 wrote:


Redacted


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
0 Kudos
260 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@ChasKy53 wrote:




Discrimination is not a State issue. It is a Constitutional issue.


Of course it's discrimination against a person adhering to their religious beliefs.  She was being told that she had to use her artitistic skills to create a cake for something she didn't believe in.  But the law being used was a state one, not a constitutional issue except regulating her religious practices.

0 Kudos
159 Views
12
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:




Discrimination is not a State issue. It is a Constitutional issue.


Of course it's discrimination against a person adhering to their religious beliefs.  She was being told that she had to use her artitistic skills to create a cake for something she didn't believe in.  But the law being used was a state one, not a constitutional issue except regulating her religious practices.


The Constitution prohibits the owner of a business or the government to discriminate against anyone because they are gay. Ironically you bring up religion The Constitution also prohibits the same owner from discriminating against someone because of their religion. I have read nothing in the Constitution that condones using a religious belief to discriminate against anyone for any reason.  All this is true regardless of state laws because the Constitution takes precedence over state laws.


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
241 Views
10
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@ChasKy53 wrote:



The Constitution prohibits the owner of a business or the government to discriminate against anyone because they are gay. Ironically you bring up religion The Constitution also prohibits the same owner from discriminating against someone because of their religion. I have read nothing in the Constitution that condones using a religious belief to discriminate against anyone for any reason.  All this is true regardless of state laws because the Constitution takes precedence over state laws.


Perhaps you can show me where the Constitution says an owner of a business is prohibited from discriminating because of being gay?  In fact I don't believe it addresses the government from doing so.  And where does it says a business owner is prohibited from discriminating against anyone because of their religion.  In fact can you show where the Constitution tells any business owner how to run their business? 

 

None of these are addressed in the Constitution.

 

200 Views
9
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Where does the Constitution say that? Same place it says Gays can marry, which SCOTUS found on 26 June 2015.

204 Views
8
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Olderscout66 wrote:

Where does the Constitution say that? Same place it says Gays can marry, which SCOTUS found on 26 June 2015.


SCOTUS found?  The Constitution still doesn't mention gays being able to marry.  In fact the Constitution says nothing about marriage.  Marriage has always been a state affair. 

0 Kudos
284 Views
7
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


TxGrandpa2 wrote:,

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Where does the Constitution say that? Same place it says Gays can marry, which SCOTUS found on 26 June 2015.


SCOTUS found?  The Constitution still doesn't mention gays being able to marry.  Nope, it doesn't.  But it does mention "equal protections under the law" and addresses "equal rights" and sexual orientation is a protected class.  Though I don't see any mention that denying a person a good or service because of the race, or sex is permitted.  It's interested that some here ignore Sharia Law is a religious belief and they never think it's OK.   In fact the Constitution says nothing about marriage. But, as mentioned previously, it does address civil rights and discrimnation.  It appears some want to legalize religious bigotry.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
288 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Centristsin2010 wrote:


SCOTUS found?  The Constitution still doesn't mention gays being able to marry.  Nope, it doesn't.  But it does mention "equal protections under the law" and addresses "equal rights" and sexual orientation is a protected class.  Though I don't see any mention that denying a person a good or service because of the race, or sex is permitted.  It's interested that some here ignore Sharia Law is a religious belief and they never think it's OK.   In fact the Constitution says nothing about marriage. But, as mentioned previously, it does address civil rights and discrimnation.  It appears some want to legalize religious bigotry.


Under which Title do you find sexual orientation as a protected class?

You will find it protected under various state civil rights laws - in fact the basis for this discussion is because of California civil rights laws.

 

292 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@GailL1 wrote:


Under which Title do you find sexual orientation as a protected class?

You will find it protected under various state civil rights laws - in fact the basis for this discussion is because of California civil rights laws.

 

I agree.  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

 


 


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
286 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Where does the Constitution say that? Same place it says Gays can marry, which SCOTUS found on 26 June 2015.


SCOTUS found?  The Constitution still doesn't mention gays being able to marry.  In fact the Constitution says nothing about marriage.  Marriage has always been a state affair. 


Marriage is no longer solely a state affair - ever since the Supreme court decision Loving v Virginia on June 12, 1967 - interracial marriage is a Constitutional affair and no longer is something over which states have control.

Interracial marriage at that point was no longer state-controlled, but was Constitutionally mandated to be legal in all 50 states.

 

Were it not for that 1967 Loving v Virgina SCOTUS decision overturning racist laws against interracial marriage - a great many marriages in the 14 "bible belt" states might well still be unlawful.

 

Would those states have repealed their anti-miscegnation laws without that decision - even to this day?  

 

Highly doubtful that they would have...

 

In the same manner, the June 26, 2015 Supreme Court decision in Obergefells v Hodges  overturned laws in fourteen remaining states and made the respective sexes of marriage partners no longer something that any of the fifty states could consider.

 

States still get to issue marriage licenses - but are required by the Constitution in Article 4 section 1  to recognize marriages, divorces and other legal decisions occurring in other states.

 

It's been that way since the February 24, 1803 decision in Marbury v Madison. when the Supreme Court Decision said that - "It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department (judicial branch) to say what the law is."

 

Judges - trained/educated in law school regarding Constitutional Law say what the law is - and the Supreme Court gets final say - or by refusing to hear an appeal says in effect - the lower court decision is clearly and obviously constitutionally correct and doesn't waste their valuable time hearing arguments about an already properly decided case - like that of Kim Davis' unconstitutional actions, for example...

 

Many have disagreed and feebly whined about so-called "judicial activism", but that decision has stood the test of time and has neither been overturned or repealed for the last 215 years.

 

 

44>dolt45
264 Views
3
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

@alferdpacker

 

Your post has no bearing on the topic and only gives you the chance to become as was termed in the military a  'guardhouse lawyer'..  While also quoting various court decisions of doubtful contributing to the topic.

 

As far as Melania, the rumor is that she sleeps in a separate bedroom therefore your signature line would be incorrect.

0 Kudos
285 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@alferdpacker

 

Your post has no bearing on the topic and only gives you the chance to become as was termed in the military a  'guardhouse lawyer'..  While also quoting various court decisions of doubtful contributing to the topic.

 

As far as Melania, the rumor is that she sleeps in a separate bedroom therefore your signature line would be incorrect.


Yeah Tex, but since the $130,000 payment to a hooker turned up, Melina sleeps in a separate STATE from POTUS the Worm.

320 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@alferdpacker

 

 

As far as Melania, the rumor is that she sleeps in a separate bedroom therefore your signature line would be incorrect.

 

Of course she does - what decent human being would want to have even the slightest physical contact with the turd that is floating in the nation's punchbowl?

I'll consider changing it when she divorces his turdlyness...

 

vaya con huevos

 

 


44>dolt45
289 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:




Discrimination is not a State issue. It is a Constitutional issue.


Of course it's discrimination against a person adhering to their religious beliefs.  She was being told that she had to use her artitistic skills to create a cake for something she didn't believe in.  But the law being used was a state one, not a constitutional issue except regulating her religious practices.


We will soon find out what the Supreme Court of the United States of America has decided about both the validity of the Colorado Law, the Colorado Constitution and what the Constitution of the United States of America has to say about the validity of the baker's appeal.

 

 

44>dolt45
165 Views
0
Report
Reply
Silver Conversationalist


@phyllisc6781 wrote:

@Loulit wrote:

What if it was just someone he didn't like. Say a person whose kid had beaten up his kid at school. Could he say, "No, I'm not baking for you. Get the h** l out of my store."  I would hope he could.

 

In the case of the same-sex couple the problem is one that pits the rights of the individual's religious freedom and freedom of speech, against the rights of a group which cannot be legally discriminated against.

 

The baker contends that a custom wedding cake celebrating a gay marriage is a work of art. The government cannot force a painter to paint, a singer to sing, a sculptor to sculpt.  If a gay couple wants a wedding band and that band does not want to perform for a same sex marriage reception, can the government make them take the stage? I sure hope not.

 

I'm for gay marriage. I'm for gay couples adopting kids. Gay married couples are entitled to all the rights an employer grants to straight couples, such as the spouse of the employee being covered by company health insurance.

 

But if the business owner finds himself morally unable to create for something his religion forbids, he should be able to say no. It's his business, his store. Maybe the best thing for the gay couple to do is walk down the street to the next bakery. If the gay couple want to protest and boycott the bakery that wouldn't serve them, they can. 

 

I usually come down on the side of the individual. In this case, the baker; a small business owner trying to stand up for what he believes. I think what he believes is ignorant and wrong -- but I wouldn't take away his right to believe it. The ACLU is representing the gay couple. I was a big fan of the ACLU until United Citizens v. Federal Elections Commission. They picked the wrong side on that one and I cancelled my membership. I was steamin'. I think the ACLU is on the wrong side again.

 

 


This is not a simple your kid hit mine. This is discrimination. This is a business owner who chose to ignore the laws against discrimination. If the owners are open for business, they are open for business to everyone. Good for ACLU! Very bad ruling on part of judge who over turned original order. A review of non-discrimination statutes might be in order. 

It is people like these bakers who make me wonder what the heck is wrong with people. I own a small business myself, and not only would I never decide non-discrimination laws didn’t apply to me, I would never be so disgustingly narcissistic or ignorant as to think I shouldn’t cater to someone due to  their choice of a mate. 

I liked the idea of the poster who said people should boycott the business until the bigoted and ignorant owners go out of business. 

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!


The gay couple has the law on their side and will most likely win the case. Then we'll live in a country where the government can tell a business owner to betray his religous principles or close his doors.

 

Great.

Trump is an aperture in the fundament.
0 Kudos
433 Views
29
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Loulit wrote:


The gay couple has the law on their side and will most likely win the case. Then we'll live in a country where the government can tell a business owner to betray his religous principles or close his doors.

 

 


Has the religious freedom part of the Constitution been done away with?  The government is forbidden to pass any law regarding religion.  According to your post they have the right to forbid anyone from practicing their religion.  What next, are they going to adopt the Roman practice of burning Christians at the stake?

0 Kudos
309 Views
26
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@Loulit wrote:


The gay couple has the law on their side and will most likely win the case. Then we'll live in a country where the government can tell a business owner to betray his religous principles or close his doors.

 

 


Has the religious freedom part of the Constitution been done away with?  The government is forbidden to pass any law regarding religion.  According to your post they have the right to forbid anyone from practicing their religion.  What next, are they going to adopt the Roman practice of burning Christians at the stake?


Where in the Roman Catholic religion does it say a baker does not have to serve every customer that comes through the door?  Is this a biblical thing? Leviticus 18:22 maybe? Exodus 21:7-11 maybe? (No that is permission to sell your daughter into servitude). Exodus 35:1-3 maybe? (No, that is putting to death anyone who works on the Sabbath). 

 

Seems to me Christians are cherry picking their verses. 

0 Kudos
294 Views
17
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:



Where in the Roman Catholic religion does it say a baker does not have to serve every customer that comes through the door?  Is this a biblical thing? Leviticus 18:22 maybe? Exodus 21:7-11 maybe? (No that is permission to sell your daughter into servitude). Exodus 35:1-3 maybe? (No, that is putting to death anyone who works on the Sabbath). 

 

 


And where did I say that I was a Catholic?  Not everyone is Catholic.  I just consider myself as a Christian, no other designation.  Additionally the verses you quoted is from the law of Moses that only applies to those of the Jewish faith.  Christians are concerned with the New Testament scriptures.

 

Have to ask now is who is cherry picking their verses?

 

And where does the government get the right to deny a person, whether in business or not that they can't adher to their beliefs.  It requires making accomodation for everything but a person's religious beliefs?  Sort of one sided and taking away one person's rights in favor of another?

0 Kudos
249 Views
16
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@Richva wrote:



Where in the Roman Catholic religion does it say a baker does not have to serve every customer that comes through the door?  Is this a biblical thing? Leviticus 18:22 maybe? Exodus 21:7-11 maybe? (No that is permission to sell your daughter into servitude). Exodus 35:1-3 maybe? (No, that is putting to death anyone who works on the Sabbath). 

 

 


And where did I say that I was a Catholic?  Not everyone is Catholic.  I just consider myself as a Christian, no other designation.  Additionally the verses you quoted is from the law of Moses that only applies to those of the Jewish faith.  Christians are concerned with the New Testament scriptures.

 

Have to ask now is who is cherry picking their verses?

 

And where does the government get the right to deny a person, whether in business or not that they can't adher to their beliefs.  It requires making accomodation for everything but a person's religious beliefs?  Sort of one sided and taking away one person's rights in favor of another?


If my religious belief is that I should cut your hand off and you come in my cake store and request me to bake a cake for you should I be allowed to cut your hand off?


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
145 Views
7
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@ChasKy53 wrote:


If my religious belief is that I should cut your hand off and you come in my cake store and request me to bake a cake for you should I be allowed to cut your hand off?


That is an outright ridiculous and  frivolous comment and doesn't deserve an answer.

0 Kudos
164 Views
6
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:


If my religious belief is that I should cut your hand off and you come in my cake store and request me to bake a cake for you should I be allowed to cut your hand off?


That is an outright ridiculous and  frivolous comment and doesn't deserve an answer.


It was intended to be a little snarky, thank you for noticing.

 

Now ....... answer the perfectly legitimate question that I asked ................ what scripture indicates that it is wrong to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple?


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
258 Views
4
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@ChasKy53 wrote:



It was intended to be a little snarky, thank you for noticing.

 

 


Why should I answer a post that was intended to be snarky?  Wouldn't that indicate that you are not interested in serious discussions?  

 

And why should I answer anyone who DEMANDS an answer?  

0 Kudos
202 Views
3
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:



It was intended to be a little snarky, thank you for noticing.

 

 


Why should I answer a post that was intended to be snarky?  Wouldn't that indicate that you are not interested in serious discussions?  

 

And why should I answer anyone who DEMANDS an answer?  


You have shown that you cannot quote a scripture which says it is wrong or a sin for a baker to create and sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.  Thank you for being so clear about it.


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
296 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@ChasKy53 wrote:



You have shown that you cannot quote a scripture which says it is wrong or a sin for a baker to create and sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.  Thank you for being so clear about it.


And you can't quote scripture where it isn't wrong.  Fact is, I doubt you even know much about the scripture.  But where the lady finds it wrong is that it would violate her religious beliefs.  Those beliefs are derived from the epistles of the Apostles, not from some religious leader, but from the scriptures.  HER religious beliefs as outlined in the Bible not YOURS

 

When did you get the authority to dictate what another person can believe religiously.   Perhaps you need to do more serious study of those epistles?

 

You just can't stand for anyone to have an opinion or belief other than yours, can you?

 

0 Kudos
286 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:



You have shown that you cannot quote a scripture which says it is wrong or a sin for a baker to create and sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.  Thank you for being so clear about it.


And you can't quote scripture where it isn't wrong. You made a claim and cannot back it up and ask me to prove it wrong. Of course you do. Fact is, I doubt you even know much about the scripture.Your "doubts" and constant insults and accusations mean nothing.  But where the lady finds it wrong is that it would violate her religious beliefs. So "religious beliefs" justify someone's actions when they wrong someone else?  Those beliefs are derived from the epistles of the Apostles, not from some religious leader, but from the scriptures. Then show those scriptures. HER religious beliefs as outlined in the Bible not YOURSThen show those scriptures, since you are making this claim.

 

When did you get the authority to dictate what another person can believe religiously. People can believe what they want but it dosn't justify them to wrong others.  Perhaps you need to do more serious study of those epistles? Perhaps you do.

 

You just can't stand for anyone to have an opinion or belief other than yours, can you? Another lame attempt at insulting. Evidently you are the one that can't. I have already stated that anyone can hold any religious belief that they desire but it doesn't justify them to wrong others. Do only Christian religious beliefs justify one to wrong others and go against the law or does that also hold true for religious beliefs other than Christian? How about Sharia law? How about all other religions that may not even believe in God?


 


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
344 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:


If my religious belief is that I should cut your hand off and you come in my cake store and request me to bake a cake for you should I be allowed to cut your hand off?


That is an outright ridiculous and  frivolous comment and doesn't deserve an answer.


No .... but your response is "an outright" evasion of the question as it points out the hypocrisy in what you believe!

DUMP TRUMP AND DITCH MITCH TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!
237 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

 

And where does the government get the right to deny a person, whether in business or not that they can't adher to their beliefs.  It requires making accomodation for everything but a person's religious beliefs?  Sort of one sided and taking away one person's rights in favor of another?

 

So - if - as you advocate - everyone should be allowed to adhere to their religious - or moral - or ethical beliefs/convictions in running their business...

 

Wouldn't that mean that a business owned and run by either non-heterosexuals - or non-christians would - by law - be allowed to discriminate against persons who are straight and/or have an opposite sex marriage - or are christians because of the beliefs - orthodox or not - of the homosexual and or non-christian business owners?

 

Should that be the Law of the Land? 

 

 What it comes down to is that all marriages are equal under the law - and are lawful marriages - Period.

 

No one can discriminate in businesses open to the public for religious reasons.

 

If the bakery wants to discriminate based upon the religious beliefs/convictions of the owners - it has to be either a bona fide church itself - or be owned and operated by a bona fide church.

 

Is allowing persons to be able to either have time off, a day off, or other consideration for religious belief and practice in any manner, shape or form an act of discrimination?

Obviously not - the Supreme Court has said so - including that as a bogus allegation of inequality is not in keeping with the Constitutionally derived valid mandates of the Law of the Land.

 

 


44>dolt45
240 Views
7
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@alferdpacker wrote:

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

 

And where does the government get the right to deny a person, whether in business or not that they can't adher to their beliefs.  It requires making accomodation for everything but a person's religious beliefs?  Sort of one sided and taking away one person's rights in favor of another?

 

So - if - as you advocate - everyone should be allowed to adhere to their religious - or moral - or ethical beliefs/convictions in running their business...

 

Wouldn't that mean that a business owned and run by either non-heterosexuals - or non-christians would - by law - be allowed to discriminate against persons who are straight and/or have an opposite sex marriage - or are christians because of the beliefs - orthodox or not - of the homosexual and or non-christian business owners?

 

Should that be the Law of the Land? 

 

 What it comes down to is that all marriages are equal under the law - and are lawful marriages - Period.

 

No one can discriminate in businesses open to the public for religious reasons.

 

If the bakery wants to discriminate based upon the religious beliefs/convictions of the owners - it has to be either a bona fide church itself - or be owned and operated by a bona fide church.

 

Is allowing persons to be able to either have time off, a day off, or other consideration for religious belief and practice in any manner, shape or form an act of discrimination?

Obviously not - the Supreme Court has said so - including that as a bogus allegation of inequality is not in keeping with the Constitutionally derived valid mandates of the Law of the Land.

 

 



I saw more than a few people fired for taking off their sabbath. the company line was..we dont recognize anyones religious holidays. so off the work you go.

So it begins.
250 Views
6
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@MIseker wrote:

@alferdpacker wrote:

 


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

 

And where does the government get the right to deny a person, whether in business or not that they can't adher to their beliefs.  It requires making accomodation for everything but a person's religious beliefs?  Sort of one sided and taking away one person's rights in favor of another?

 

So - if - as you advocate - everyone should be allowed to adhere to their religious - or moral - or ethical beliefs/convictions in running their business...

 

Wouldn't that mean that a business owned and run by either non-heterosexuals - or non-christians would - by law - be allowed to discriminate against persons who are straight and/or have an opposite sex marriage - or are christians because of the beliefs - orthodox or not - of the homosexual and or non-christian business owners?

 

Should that be the Law of the Land? 

 

 What it comes down to is that all marriages are equal under the law - and are lawful marriages - Period.

 

No one can discriminate in businesses open to the public for religious reasons.

 

If the bakery wants to discriminate based upon the religious beliefs/convictions of the owners - it has to be either a bona fide church itself - or be owned and operated by a bona fide church.

 

Is allowing persons to be able to either have time off, a day off, or other consideration for religious belief and practice in any manner, shape or form an act of discrimination?

Obviously not - the Supreme Court has said so - including that as a bogus allegation of inequality is not in keeping with the Constitutionally derived valid mandates of the Law of the Land.

 

 



I saw more than a few people fired for taking off their sabbath. the company line was..we dont recognize anyones religious holidays. so off the work you go.


Sounds absolutely fair and equitable.

 

Yep - remember that in subs too - our duty schedule rotated, so everybody worked on part of a holiday...   There were religious services that made it possible for those who had come off duty to worship - if sleep wasn't a greater priority...

 

 

44>dolt45
249 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@MIseker wrote:




I saw more than a few people fired for taking off their sabbath. the company line was..we dont recognize anyones religious holidays. so off the work you go.


Years ago had a friend that worked for the Post Office.  He insisted on taking Saturday off for the Sabbath.  The Post Master said no.  The guy was put on probation as it was understood that the Post Office had deliveries on Saturday when he was employed.  He probably was eventually terminated.

 

In those types of jobs requiring work on Saturday or Sundays it should have been understood that they would or might be required to work.

 

This has nothing to do with the baker's situation.

0 Kudos
247 Views
4
Report
Reply
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png