Meet the baker who lost his business over gay wedding cakes

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.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.