Posted on 06/26/2017 2:03:27 PM PDT by Artemis Webb
A Colorado clash between gay rights and religion started as an angry Facebook posting about a wedding cake but now has big implications for anti-discrimination laws in 22 states.
Baker Jack Phillips is challenging a Colorado law that says he was wrong to have turned away a same-sex couple who wanted a cake to celebrate their 2012 wedding.
The justices said Monday they will consider Phillips' case, which could affect all states. Twenty-two states include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws that bar discrimination in public accommodations.
Phillips argues that he turned away Charlie Craig and David Mullins not because they are gay, but because their wedding violated Phillips' religious belief.
After the couple was turned away in 2012, they complained about Masterpiece Cakeshop on Facebook, then filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The state sided with the couple.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Question
where did the homosexuals finally get their cake made ???
This is the same court that approved gay “marriage”.
There are still only three conservatives on the court.
Unless 2 more are added before this case is heard, I doubt you are going to like the outcome.
Do not hold your breath for this one. Kennedy and Roberts voted for gays in the birth certificate case.
Marriage is none of the feds friggin’ business. Marriage is strictly a personal and state issue, not a federal issue. The Constitution gives the feds no authority to interfere with marriage at all.
Yep...not going to be the correct outcome. Now every business in America will have to cater to gays.
People can always get a cake made elsewhere.
If a homosexual came in and wanted to buy a cake, nobody would say anything.
It’s when they want an event catered the owner doesn’t condone that they run into trouble.
Big events are planed far ahead. So order far ahead from another provider. Certainly there must by many businesses owned and operated by the 79% of U.S. Citizens that are homosexuals. (as if)
Owners should be able to say, I appreciate your business for general things, birthdays, and some other events, but weddings or other events we cannot endorse, we cannot serve you.
GET OVER IT!
I thought this issue was settled with the below ruling. I thought the 2015 gay marriage ruling did a sufficient rewrite of our Constitution to exclude equal legal protection for the believers in classical Christian thought.
Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion stated, “The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to advocate and teach the principles that are so fulfilling and central to their lives and faith”. Such language severely restricts religious freedom by excluding “free exercise thereof”.
The term “speech or expression’ seems an innocuous expansion of the First amendment. However, “expression” enables a nearly unbounded multi-billion dollar pornography industry.
I then saw this country departing so far from first principles that a woman could express herself in the adult film industry, but could not operate a bakery and exercise her religious convictions by refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple.
The Formal End to Judeo-Christian America
http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2015/06/30/the-formal-end-to-judeochristian-america-n2018986/page/full
Wayne Cordeiro
https://www.facebook.com/pastorwaynecordeiro/posts/10153325310351210
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES GAY MARRIAGE
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
If the court compels the guy to bake the cake, religious liberty for individuals in this country will die. Afterwards, only religious institutions will be considered “covered” by the 1st amendment.
They went to Mexico and got a sheetcake.
They won’t — might as well ask frogs not to be green — the very scene is now focused on pushing itself in everybody’s face.
Everywhere is freaks and hairies / Dykes and fairies, tell me where is sanity.
Baking cakes isn’t the issue... it’s graphically dedicating same to persons and a relationship. This is a 1st amendment issue.
Hopefully the SCOTUS will come down right on it.
Why should they enforce rights for folks who are homosexual one day, and married to an opposite sex person a few years later?
This means that Justice Kennedy will not retire.
Kennedy will hang around just long enough to vote against the Christians. He’s a stinking bigot.
Yankee doodle is no more/sunk his name and station/Swishy doodle takes his place/and favors degradation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.