If you're a regular GetReligion reader, you're probably familiar with the Sweet Cakes case in Oregon.

We've posted on it more than once:

That case is back in the news this week:

The Oregonian newspaper in Portland has solid, balanced coverage of the latest news.

The lede:

The Oregon couple who made national headlines when they refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding are now refusing to pay state-ordered damages to the lesbian couple they turned away.

In response, state officials have gone to court to establish their right to place a property lien or attach other assets belonging to Aaron and Melissa Klein, proprietors of the Sweet Cakes by Melissa bakery.

The Kleins filed an appeal of the state ruling in July but also have defied a Bureau of Labor and Industries order to pay $135,000 to Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer, claiming financial hardship despite crowdfunding efforts that have raised more than $500,000 on their behalf.

Most recently, one of their lawyers wrote to the labor bureau to say: "Our clients do not have a bond or irrevocable letter of credit in place and have no further plans to obtain either one."

The Kleins' refusal to pay marks another chapter in the long-running controversy pitting their claims of religious freedom against enforcement of anti-discrimination laws requiring Oregon businesses to serve the public equally.

There does seem to be some dispute concerning the $500,000 figure reported by The Oregonian.

A Reuters story posted by Religion News Service notes:

An attorney representing the Kleins, Herb Grey, said the couple has raised far less than $500,000, but declined to give an exact number. He also said they should not be obligated to pay the damages because the case is not settled.

Speaking of RNS, your GetReligionistas continue to receive frequent complaints from readers concerned about certain writers mixing personal opinion on social media with alleged unbiased coverage of controversial issues. 

This snark from Cathy Lynn Grossman, RNS senior national correspondent, concerning the Oregon case is typical:

To the reader who shared that tweet: I feel your pain.

On Facebook this week, Grossman wrote:

Before the Davis flap went public there was still controversy to be found in the papal visit. (Notice, no abuse victims who met the pope cashing in on the spotlight for their years of suffering, unlike the marriage-martyr-of-KY)

Last week, another reader pointed to what the reader called "hashtag advocacy" by RNS on its institutional Twitter account:

At this point, I'm honestly not certain RNS gives a hoot about maintaining an appearance of impartiality on the issues that its reporters cover.

But as always, we at GetReligion are open to opposing viewpoints on the journalism issues that we cover, as opposed to arguments about the religious issues themselves, and evidence to the contrary. By all means, please leave a comment below or tweet us at @GetReligion.