Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Meet the baker who lost his business over gay wedding cakes

September 30, 2014
Wilson

Writer

Glenn interviewed Aaron Klein on radio today, he and his wife own and operate Sweet Cakes by Melissa. They were targeted and attacked after they declined to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple. The media labeled this hate, but these bakers had actually served this particular couple several other times. The only reason they declined is because this wedding cake went against their own personal religious beliefs. Watch the interview and judge for yourself -- does this sound like a hateful person?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: So glad that you're here today. I want to -- I'm really excited to introduce you to a couple that you knew the story of. You know the story about the Christian baker who lost their shop in Oregon because they refused to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple. Well, I met the -- I met the Klein's. I met Aaron and Melissa Klein, what, Saturday in Washington, D.C. and there's a great story on them on the Blaze today. But I really want you to hear from Aaron himself and is Melissa with you or not.

AARON: No. Melissa is at home with the kids. I'm actually at work.

GLENN: You guys lost your bakery. Tell me the story quickly in your own words of what happened.

AARON: Well, you know, marriage was defined by the State of Oregon's Constitution as between a man and a woman up until I believe it was May of this year. Our belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. And the Bible coincides with that.

You know, we -- we -- you know, we had a small bakery. We did wedding cakes. Birthday cakes. All sorts of cakes.

In January 2013, we had a gal come in and asked us to basically create a piece of artwork for something the Bible clearly states is, you know, not the definition of marriage. So through all this, we've ended up losing our shop due to some really mean-spirited tactics that was used by -- I wouldn't say all the LGBT community. Because we met quite a few of them that are really nice, but there are some that really wanted us to close our doors. And through everything that's been done. You know, they've harassed the wedding vendors that we did business with. They protested. Boycotted. In fact, there's still an only boycott on Facebook going on. And I get it. They killed the wedding end of our business and we did have to close our doors last September. And, you know, I went to back to work driving trucks. So...

GLENN: Now, I saw the wedding cakes. My father was a baker, and he was one of the best cake decorators I'd ever seen. Since he was a little boy, he worked in my grandfather's bakery, and all he wanted to do was decorate cakes. And so he just -- he ice cakes and ice cakes and ice cakes over and over again. And he was just an amazing artist. I've seen your wedding cakes. They're absolutely beautiful. I've met you guys this weekend. You guys have this in your DNA. So what are you going to do now?

AARON: The thing is, we dedicated everything we did in our shop to the glory of God just as we do everything else in our lives. It's all an act of worship. To go against what the Bible says -- how can you glorify God when you're doing something strictly against what his Word says.

GLENN: Before you go any further, I want to read something your wife said in the story on the Blaze: Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is, you disagree with somebody's lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. Second is that to love someone means you must disagree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense.

So if I'm a listener and I'm hearing you talk about this, you're talking about the Bible an awful lot, and I'm a listener, and I don't believe the Bible and I'm hearing, okay, get over the Bible thing and whatever. You're a hater. Can you address that and kind of what your wife said in The Blaze story?

AARON: Okay. She posted that to a business page. And that's a quote from Rick Warren. So yeah, it's very true. It's not about hate. It's not about -- it's strictly about adhering to our faith. I don't expect everybody to agree with me, but I expect that I would get the freedom the constitution provides me to do that.

GLENN: So if somebody comes into your -- this is where I am -- look, I believe what I believe. But if you're gay or lesbian, you're telling me you can't change your point of view. Well, I'm telling you the same thing about my lifestyle. I believe in God.

There's times I don't want to believe in this stuff. It's not easy. Just like you would say if you're gay, it's not easy being gay in today's world. I know. It's not easy to be religious in today's world as well. So we have that in common.

So what you choose to do with your life is your deal, man. That's your deal. This is mine. Can't I respect you and say, first of all, why do you want a cake made from somebody who doesn't believe you're doing the right thing? And second of all, just go find somebody else to make a cake. I don't hate you. Can't I have my right to who I am as well?

AARON: And that's what it is in a nutshell. We have no problem making cakes for anybody, any sexual preference. It was that specific event, you know. And, like I said, down there in D.C. they're return customers. It was not the first time they came in. It was not about hate. It was not about discrimination. It was strictly about the definition of marriage and what I believed to be true.

GLENN: So you knew them? They were repeat customers. Did you know them more than just, hey, thanks very much for stopping by. Did you know them?

AARON: They had come in and actually ordered a wedding cake for one of the girl's moms and paid for it a couple years prior. I'm horrible with names and faces. So I didn't recognize her right off the bat. It wasn't until I actually got the complaint from the DOJ that I realized who it was.

STU: You brought up a great point, too, which is the Oregon constitution specifies that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is an amendment approved in 2004 by 13 points in Oregon. I mean, they're basically asking you to make a cake for an event that the constitution says is illegal.

PAT: And then you lost your place because of it. That's --

AARON: The odd part about it is the state of Oregon was actually in violation of their own statute. All the county clerks of the state of Oregon were not issuing same-sex marriage licenses, which actually puts them in violation of their own statute. They're expecting me to abide to something the state itself won't abide by, which is very ironic and hypocritical.

PAT: How did you guys not turn out -- I mean, you don't sound bitter about all this. I think I would have been.

AARON: Well, if you read the book of James, it says to consider it pure joy when you're persecuted for the name of Christ. If they're going to persecute me for standing by God's word, then it's pure enjoy.

GLENN: I have to tell you, I met you guys, Pat was pissed at me because I didn't walk you over to his highness Pat, but he was like, they were there? I didn't meet them? I'm like, I'm sorry your royal highness, but my wife spent some time talking to you both, and I found you both very reasonable, kind, courteous, quiet, gentle, I really felt you guys were really good people, which is good to know. Because there are some people like, yeah, them gays, I'll tell you what. You know, what is that?

AARON: That attitude is not an attitude of love. We're supposed to show the love of Christ to all people we meet. To be downright spiteful and hateful would be wrong, and that's me. Despite the lies that have been spread, it's not about that. You know, I liken it to: If your child wants to go run and play in the streets, they might throw a fit if you tell them no. But you don't let them do it, because that's not loving. In this situation, by no means am I calling anyone a child, but I'm saying I won't help someone do something that might be detrimental to their salvation.

GLENN: It doesn't matter what you think is right or wrong about me. You tell me about my lifestyle. You know, stand in line. I got a lot of people telling me what to do. What matters to me is that we all retain our right to be who we are and really celebrate diversity. They have a right to go do that. Go do that. That's fine.

PAT: It's amazing that wasn't a violation of your religious sensibilities. It's amazing to me that somehow the Constitution, the first amendment didn't protect you guys.

AARON: Yeah. It's totally being ignored by this administrative court. They've totally ignored all constitutional rights. In fact, they've said it's not allowed in the court. The attorney general of the state of Oregon has to take care of that. I don't know. It's a totally different scenario. Brad Avakian, the Commissioner of Bureau, Labor, and Industry, seems to be the judge, the jury, and the executioner.

GLENN: So have you changed your mind at all on like where you live and what you do and --

AARON: I actually don't live in the Portland metro area. You know, and honestly, we're supposed to be salt and light. If I go run and hide, I can't be salt and light. That's one of those things where, you know, change of venue might be nice, but then, again, I'm going to go where God leads me.

STU: This brings up an interesting question, which is, when do we get cake?

GLENN: I thought your interesting question was going to be this: We have 400,000 square feet down in Texas, why don't we have a bakery there?

PAT: That's an excellent question.

GLENN: I do believe a few things fall into place. We may have to have our own bakery at the studios. I'm just saying.

Aaron, God bless you and your wife, Melissa. I urge everyone to read the article on the Blaze. Aaron or maybe Melissa gave a great compliment, they said thank you for having a website that actually cared about getting the story right. I can't imagine how many stories were written about you two and it was not -- it wasn't exactly accurate.

AARON: Yeah. Well, a lot of them were just down right dishonest. But yeah, we really appreciate TheBlaze doing such a good job of telling the truth and telling it like it is. And it was really nice meeting you guys and I appreciate all you do.

GLENN: Thank you very much and it probably was -- the highlight was not meeting Pat. Aaron, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

AARON: Not a problem.

Trump's proposal explained: Ukraine's path to peace without NATO expansion

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor | Getty Images

Strategic compromise, not absolute victory, often ensures lasting stability.

When has any country been asked to give up land it won in a war? Even if a nation is at fault, the punishment must be measured.

After World War I, Germany, the main aggressor, faced harsh penalties under the Treaty of Versailles. Germans resented the restrictions, and that resentment fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler, ultimately leading to World War II. History teaches that justice for transgressions must avoid creating conditions for future conflict.

Ukraine and Russia must choose to either continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

Russia and Ukraine now stand at a similar crossroads. They can cling to disputed land and prolong a devastating war, or they can make concessions that might secure a lasting peace. The stakes could not be higher: Tens of thousands die each month, and the choice between endless bloodshed and negotiated stability hinges on each side’s willingness to yield.

History offers a guide. In 1967, Israel faced annihilation. Surrounded by hostile armies, the nation fought back and seized large swaths of territory from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Yet Israel did not seek an empire. It held only the buffer zones needed for survival and returned most of the land. Security and peace, not conquest, drove its decisions.

Peace requires concessions

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine will need to “get something” from a peace deal. He’s right. Israel proved that survival outweighs pride. By giving up land in exchange for recognition and an end to hostilities, it stopped the cycle of war. Egypt and Israel have not fought in more than 50 years.

Russia and Ukraine now press opposing security demands. Moscow wants a buffer to block NATO. Kyiv, scarred by invasion, seeks NATO membership — a pledge that any attack would trigger collective defense by the United States and Europe.

President Donald Trump and his allies have floated a middle path: an Article 5-style guarantee without full NATO membership. Article 5, the core of NATO’s charter, declares that an attack on one is an attack on all. For Ukraine, such a pledge would act as a powerful deterrent. For Russia, it might be more palatable than NATO expansion to its border

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Peace requires concessions. The human cost is staggering: U.S. estimates indicate 20,000 Russian soldiers died in a single month — nearly half the total U.S. casualties in Vietnam — and the toll on Ukrainians is also severe. To stop this bloodshed, both sides need to recognize reality on the ground, make difficult choices, and anchor negotiations in security and peace rather than pride.

Peace or bloodshed?

Both Russia and Ukraine claim deep historical grievances. Ukraine arguably has a stronger claim of injustice. But the question is not whose parchment is older or whose deed is more valid. The question is whether either side is willing to trade some land for the lives of thousands of innocent people. True security, not historical vindication, must guide the path forward.

History shows that punitive measures or rigid insistence on territorial claims can perpetuate cycles of war. Germany’s punishment after World War I contributed directly to World War II. By contrast, Israel’s willingness to cede land for security and recognition created enduring peace. Ukraine and Russia now face the same choice: Continue the cycle of bloodshed or make difficult compromises in pursuit of survival and stability.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The loneliness epidemic: Are machines replacing human connection?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Seniors, children, and the isolated increasingly rely on machines for conversation, risking real relationships and the emotional depth that only humans provide.

Jill Smola is 75 years old. She’s a retiree from Orlando, Florida, and she spent her life caring for the elderly. She played games, assembled puzzles, and offered company to those who otherwise would have sat alone.

Now, she sits alone herself. Her husband has died. She has a lung condition. She can’t drive. She can’t leave her home. Weeks can pass without human interaction.

Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

But CBS News reports that she has a new companion. And she likes this companion more than her own daughter.

The companion? Artificial intelligence.

She spends five hours a day talking to her AI friend. They play games, do trivia, and just talk. She says she even prefers it to real people.

My first thought was simple: Stop this. We are losing our humanity.

But as I sat with the story, I realized something uncomfortable. Maybe we’ve already lost some of our humanity — not to AI, but to ourselves.

Outsourcing presence

How often do we know the right thing to do yet fail to act? We know we should visit the lonely. We know we should sit with someone in pain. We know what Jesus would do: Notice the forgotten, touch the untouchable, offer time and attention without outsourcing compassion.

Yet how often do we just … talk about it? On the radio, online, in lectures, in posts. We pontificate, and then we retreat.

I asked myself: What am I actually doing to close the distance between knowing and doing?

Human connection is messy. It’s inconvenient. It takes patience, humility, and endurance. AI doesn’t challenge you. It doesn’t interrupt your day. It doesn’t ask anything of you. Real people do. Real people make us confront our pride, our discomfort, our loneliness.

We’ve built an economy of convenience. We can have groceries delivered, movies streamed, answers instantly. But friendships — real relationships — are slow, inefficient, unpredictable. They happen in the blank spaces of life that we’ve been trained to ignore.

And now we’re replacing that inefficiency with machines.

AI provides comfort without challenge. It eliminates the risk of real intimacy. It’s an elegant coping mechanism for loneliness, but a poor substitute for life. If we’re not careful, the lonely won’t just be alone — they’ll be alone with an anesthetic, a shadow that never asks for anything, never interrupts, never makes them grow.

Reclaiming our humanity

We need to reclaim our humanity. Presence matters. Not theory. Not outrage. Action.

It starts small. Pull up a chair for someone who eats alone. Call a neighbor you haven’t spoken to in months. Visit a nursing home once a month — then once a week. Ask their names, hear their stories. Teach your children how to be present, to sit with someone in grief, without rushing to fix it.

Turn phones off at dinner. Make Sunday afternoons human time. Listen. Ask questions. Don’t post about it afterward. Make the act itself sacred.

Humility is central. We prefer machines because we can control them. Real people are inconvenient. They interrupt our narratives. They demand patience, forgiveness, and endurance. They make us confront ourselves.

A friend will challenge your self-image. A chatbot won’t.

Our homes are quieter. Our streets are emptier. Loneliness is an epidemic. And AI will not fix it. It will only dull the edges and make a diminished life tolerable.

Before we worry about how AI will reshape humanity, we must first practice humanity. It can start with 15 minutes a day of undivided attention, presence, and listening.

Change usually comes when pain finally wins. Let’s not wait for that. Let’s start now. Because real connection restores faster than any machine ever will.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Exposed: The radical Left's bloody rampage against America

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

For years, the media warned of right-wing terror. But the bullets, bombs, and body bags are piling up on the left — with support from Democrat leaders and voters.

For decades, the media and federal agencies have warned Americans that the greatest threat to our homeland is the political right — gun-owning veterans, conservative Christians, anyone who ever voted for President Donald Trump. President Joe Biden once declared that white supremacy is “the single most dangerous terrorist threat” in the nation.

Since Trump’s re-election, the rhetoric has only escalated. Outlets like the Washington Post and the Guardian warned that his second term would trigger a wave of far-right violence.

As Democrats bleed working-class voters and lose control of their base, they’re not moderating. They’re radicalizing.

They were wrong.

The real domestic threat isn’t coming from MAGA grandmas or rifle-toting red-staters. It’s coming from the radical left — the anarchists, the Marxists, the pro-Palestinian militants, and the anti-American agitators who have declared war on law enforcement, elected officials, and civil society.

Willful blindness

On July 4, a group of black-clad terrorists ambushed an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Alvarado, Texas. They hurled fireworks at the building, spray-painted graffiti, and then opened fire on responding law enforcement, shooting a local officer in the neck. Journalist Andy Ngo has linked the attackers to an Antifa cell in the Dallas area.

Authorities have so far charged 14 people in the plot and recovered AR-style rifles, body armor, Kevlar vests, helmets, tactical gloves, and radios. According to the Department of Justice, this was a “planned ambush with intent to kill.”

And it wasn’t an isolated incident. It’s part of a growing pattern of continuous violent left-wing incidents since December last year.

Monthly attacks

Most notably, in December 2024, 26-year-old Luigi Mangione allegedly gunned down UnitedHealth Group CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan. Mangione reportedly left a manifesto raging against the American health care system and was glorified by some on social media as a kind of modern Robin Hood.

One Emerson College poll found that 41% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 said the murder was “acceptable” or “somewhat acceptable.”

The next month, a man carrying Molotov cocktails was arrested near the U.S. Capitol. He allegedly planned to assassinate Trump-appointed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and House Speaker Mike Johnson.

In February, the “Tesla Takedown” attacks on Tesla vehicles and dealerships started picking up traction.

In March, a self-described “queer scientist” was arrested after allegedly firebombing the Republican Party headquarters in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Graffiti on the burned building read “ICE = KKK.”

In April, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s (D-Pa.) official residence was firebombed on Passover night. The suspect allegedly set the governor’s mansion on fire because of what Shapiro, who is Jewish, “wants to do to the Palestinian people.”

In May, two young Israeli embassy staffers were shot and killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C. Witnesses said the shooter shouted “Free Palestine” as he was being arrested. The suspect told police he acted “for Gaza” and was reportedly linked to the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

In June, an Egyptian national who had entered the U.S. illegally allegedly threw a firebomb at a peaceful pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado. Eight people were hospitalized, and an 82-year-old Holocaust survivor later died from her injuries.

That same month, a pro-Palestinian rioter in New York was arrested for allegedly setting fire to 11 police vehicles. In Los Angeles, anti-ICE rioters smashed cars, set fires, and hurled rocks at law enforcement. House Democrats refused to condemn the violence.

Barbara Davidson / Contributor | Getty Images

In Portland, Oregon, rioters tried to burn down another ICE facility and assaulted police officers before being dispersed with tear gas. Graffiti left behind read: “Kill your masters.”

On July 7, a Michigan man opened fire on a Customs and Border Protection facility in McAllen, Texas, wounding two police officers and an agent. Border agents returned fire, killing the suspect.

Days later in California, ICE officers conducting a raid on an illegal cannabis farm in Ventura County were attacked by left-wing activists. One protester appeared to fire at federal agents.

This is not a series of isolated incidents. It’s a timeline of escalation. Political assassinations, firebombings, arson, ambushes — all carried out in the name of radical leftist ideology.

Democrats are radicalizing

This isn’t just the work of fringe agitators. It’s being enabled — and in many cases encouraged — by elected Democrats.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz routinely calls ICE “Trump’s modern-day Gestapo.” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass attempted to block an ICE operation in her city. Boston Mayor Michelle Wu compared ICE agents to a neo-Nazi group. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson referred to them as “secret police terrorizing our communities.”

Apparently, other Democratic lawmakers, according to Axios, are privately troubled by their own base. One unnamed House Democrat admitted that supporters were urging members to escalate further: “Some of them have suggested what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Others were demanding blood in the streets to get the media’s attention.

A study from Rutgers University and the National Contagion Research Institute found that 55% of Americans who identify as “left of center” believe that murdering Donald Trump would be at least “somewhat justified.”

As Democrats bleed working-class voters and lose control of their base, they’re not moderating. They’re radicalizing. They don’t want the chaos to stop. They want to harness it, normalize it, and weaponize it.

The truth is, this isn’t just about ICE. It’s not even about Trump. It’s about whether a republic can survive when one major party decides that our institutions no longer apply.

Truth still matters. Law and order still matter. And if the left refuses to defend them, then we must be the ones who do.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

America's comeback: Trump is crushing crime in the Capitol

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

Trump’s DC crackdown is about more than controlling crime — it’s about restoring America’s strength and credibility on the world stage.

Donald Trump on Monday invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, placing the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control and deploying the National Guard to restore law and order. This move is long overdue.

D.C.’s crime problem has been spiraling for years as local authorities and Democratic leadership have abandoned the nation’s capital to the consequences of their own failed policies. The city’s murder rate is about three times higher than that of Islamabad, Pakistan, and 18 times higher than that of communist-led Havana, Cuba.

When DC is in chaos, it sends a message to the world that America is weak.

Theft, assaults, and carjackings have transformed many of its streets into war zones. D.C. saw a 32% increase in homicides from 2022 to 2023, marking the highest number in two decades and surpassing both New York and Los Angeles. Even if crime rates dropped to 2019 levels, that wouldn’t be good enough.

Local leaders have downplayed the crisis, manipulating crime stats to preserve their image. Felony assault, for example, is no longer considered a “violent crime” in their crime stats. Same with carjacking. But the reality on the streets is different. People in D.C. are living in constant fear.

Trump isn’t waiting for the crime rate to improve on its own. He’s taking action.

Broken windows theory in action

Trump’s takeover of D.C. puts the “broken windows theory” into action — the idea that ignoring minor crimes invites bigger ones. When authorities look the other way on turnstile-jumping or graffiti, they signal that lawbreaking carries no real consequence.

Rudy Giuliani used this approach in the 1990s to clean up New York, cracking down on small offenses before they escalated. Trump is doing the same in the capital, drawing a hard line and declaring enough is enough. Letting crime fester in Washington tells the world that the seat of American power tolerates lawlessness.

What Trump is doing for D.C. isn’t just about law enforcement — it’s about national identity. When D.C. is in chaos, it sends a message to the world that America is weak. The capital city represents the soul of the country. If we can’t even keep our own capital safe, how can we expect anyone to take us seriously?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Reversing the decline

Anyone who has visited D.C. regularly over the past several years has witnessed its rapid decline. Homeless people bathe in the fountains outside Union Station. People are tripping out in Dupont Circle. The left’s negligence is a disgrace, enabling drug use and homelessness to explode on our capital’s streets while depriving these individuals of desperately needed care and help.

Restoring law and order to D.C. is not about politics or scoring points. It’s about doing what’s right for the people. It’s about protecting communities, taking the vulnerable off the streets, and sending the message to both law-abiding and law-breaking citizens alike that the rule of law matters.

D.C. should be a lesson to the rest of America. If we want to take our cities back, we need leadership willing to take bold action. Trump is showing how to do it.

Now, it’s time for other cities to step up and follow his lead. We can restore law and order. We can make our cities something to be proud of again.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.