At stake: America's core value of religious freedom
A high-profile case before the U.S. Supreme Court today – Masterpiece Cakeshop v. the Colorado Civil Rights Commission – is predicted to be a landmark case on the First Amendment rights of free speech and religious freedom. The Associated Press reports that Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is considered to be the "swing vote" in the ultimate ruling, voiced "competing concerns" during today's oral arguments.
In July 2012, a same-sex couple walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, and asked owner Jack Phillips for a custom wedding cake. Phillips had no problem serving Charlie Craig and David Mullins – in fact, he had done so several times before. But what the Christian baker politely refused to do was to use his artistry to support a same-sex "marriage" ceremony. Craig and Mullins sued Phillips under the state's anti-discrimination law.
"Jack [Phillips] is on the front lines for us all as we desire to live in a truly free society tolerant of a biblical worldview."
Dr. Jerry A. Johnson, President & CEO
National Religious Broadcasters
"[Jack] Phillips does not discriminate against anyone because of who they are. He serves all customers – he just doesn't communicate all messages, namely those that violate his conscience. And the government should not force him to do so."
Monica Burke, research assistant
The Heritage Foundation
"... Viewpoints, messages, and speech can be expressed in many forms – including the creation of a cake for a ceremony. Public accommodation laws are used to protect people against unequal treatment, not to force citizens to participate and then endorse an activity with which they disagree."
Jonathan Alexandre, director of public policy
Liberty Counsel
Dr. Richard Land is the former head of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and now president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in North Carolina.
Land, Dr. Richard (SBC, ERLC)"[Jack Phillips] said he would bake them a cake," Land begins. "He just didn't feel that he could lend his expertise – his talent, which he believes comes from God – to celebrate that which he finds morally unconscionable."
Colorado found Philips guilty of discrimination, and the case finally was heard this morning in the highest court in the U.S. But according to Land, it's about so much more than cakes.
"It's about conscience and religious freedom," he explains. "It's about the most basic core values of the American experiment – the belief that we have freedom of conscience and freedom of faith."
The prosecution says the First Amendment doesn't apply because the anti-discrimination laws Phillips allegedly broke target conduct, not speech. Land says if the particulars were changed, many who are so certain Phillips is nothing more than a homophobic bigot might change their minds.
"It's no different than requiring a Muslim butcher to provide pork sausage to a customer, even though Muslims believe that pork is something they're not to touch," he suggests.
He says the religious freedom of all believers is at stake. "It's one thing to say that you're going to make same-sex marriage legal – [but] it's another thing to say that we're going to weaponize our own government against its own citizens and say We want to compel you to affirm it."
The Supreme Court's is expected to announce its decision in the case by late June.. https://www.onenewsnow.com/legal-courts/2017/12/05/at-stake-americas-core-value-of-religious-freedom
Tags
Who is online
74 visitors
Are you "Adela" on Yahoo.com ? Same avatar, just wondering.
Are you kidding me?! Whenever I see this false equivalency pop up, I then know that advocates for this baker are getting desperate!
If the baker didn't normally make wedding cakes and he declined we would not be having this conversation, but he makes and sells wedding cakes, you can decline services that you normally do for the rest of the public, so unless the Muslim butcher normally sells pork sausages.....they are in no way shape or form even close to being the same!
I have yet to see any valid argument proving how Mr. Phillips religious freedom has been violated. As far as I know, Mr. Phillips is still free to believe whatever he wants, attend the religious institution of his choice, and practice his religion however he sees fit. But a bakery is not a religious institution and baking a cake is not a religious practice. And as a business owner operating a business which serves the public, he is required (and agreed) to follow all local and state laws, including anti-discrimination and public accommodation laws. If he sees compliance with the law as a violation of his beliefs, then perhaps he should change businesses or operate his as a "members-only" business where such laws do not apply to him. That would solve the issue.
C4P and his religious fatwa on our way of life are getting tiresome. But the sanctimonious basis on which it rests is as odious as ever. The corruption of the idea of religious "freedom" to make it a weapon with which to discriminate and humiliate others is what religious states, such as Saudi Arabia and others, impose by law on their citizens. It's unAmerican in the extreme.
(BTW, C4P, do you think by constantly changing your moniker you're actually fooling anybody about who you are?)
This is what the nativity scene looks like if you remove the Jews, Arabs, Black man, and the teenage girl with a child born out of wedlock. Add conservatives to the list and it's just a picture of some grass
Wedding cakes are over rated, serve more shrimp, pork, roast beef, country ham and BEER