Posted on 03/24/2021 8:35:26 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In 2018, Colorado baker Jack Phillips, a devout Christian, won a victory in the Supreme Court over a case in which he refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple citing his deeply held religious beliefs. On Monday, Phillips went on trial again, this time because a transgender activist wanted him to make a birthday cake and he refused.
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case of 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission evinced anti-religious bias for targeting Phillips for refusing to make a same-sex wedding cake. The Court did not rule whether a business could claim religious objections permitted them to refuse service to gays or lesbians.
On June 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court ruled that it would hear Phillips’ case against the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which revolved around him turning down a request to make the wedding cake for a gay couple in 2012. After he was targeted by the state of Colorado, Phillips was barred from designing custom wedding cakes, which, as the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) noted, represented around 40% of his business. ADF also noted that one of the commissioners belittled Phillips’ religious freedom defense, calling it a “despicable piece of rhetoric.”
The very day that the Supreme Court decided to hear Phillips’ case, his wife, Debi, got a call from Denver transgender attorney Autumn Scardina asking Phillips to make a birthday cake celebrating Scardina’s “gender transition.”
ADF explained:
Over the years, Jack has declined many requests to create cakes that express messages he disagrees with—including Halloween cakes (even though Halloween cakes are a significant source of revenue for many cake shops) and cakes that disparage certain groups of people, including people who identify as LGBT. And in the years since Jack’s first case became public, Masterpiece Cakeshop had received numerous requests from people seeking to harass Jack—requests for cakes depicting drug use, cakes displaying sexually explicit materials, even cakes celebrating Satan or depicting satanic symbols. At least one of these requests (for a cake celebrating Satan) was from the very same attorney (Scardina) who requested the pink and blue gender-transition cake.
Despite the fact that the Supreme Court ruled for Phillips, the state of Colorado targeted him again, this time over the “gender transition” cake. That prompted Phillips to file a lawsuit against the state, saying it had violated his First Amendment right to practice his faith and his right to equal protection under the 14th Amendment.
Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel, the judge in the new lawsuit case, disagreed with state officials, who wanted the case to be dismissed, and let the case move forward, asserting he would issue a ruling later. He stated that the Supreme Court ruling was more relevant to the current case than the state believed.
On Monday, during the virtual trial, Scardina denied that the initial call to Phillips was a “setup,” adding, “It was more of calling someone’s bluff.”
Sean Gates, representing Phillips, stated that he could not create a cake with the message Scardina requested; Gates added, “The message would be that he agrees that a gender transition is something to be celebrated.”
If anything this is now, de facto, religious persecution and he should counter sue the tranny for violating his civil rights!
The owner needs to stop accepting walk in cake orders, and only take them online or by phone.
He could use the store just to sell already baked and decorated products.
I don’t know. Maybe Jack enjoys battling with these fools.
But those fools can be destructive.
RE: The owner needs to stop accepting walk in cake orders, and only take them online or by phone.
How’s that going to change things? The orders can still tell him what message to put on the cakes he bake.
This guy fights.
Hope he’s getting assistance with legal defense.
No this is a freedom issue.
He is being targeted and persecuted.
He needs to sue them into next week.
The original prosecution was a persecution. The state itself did not tecgnize same sex weddings at the time.
The bad news? There’s still 57 other sexual identities that’ll want to sue him.
His rights need to be protected.
There laws about conspiring to harass someone.
Just go to a gay bakery
The lawyer representing the freak must know he’s gonna lose this one. So it must be about the billable hours!
It is too the point that we would be much better off if none of it existed.
An honest system, double jeopardy, would stop this marxist nonsense in it’s tracks. The dishonesty extends to peers of judge not demanding dismissal, media for not taking side if angels, neighbors for not rallying, etc.
Corrupt times... living through Sodom & Gomorrah
HE NEEDS TO SUE THEM INTO NEXT CENTURY!!
HE NEEDS TO SUE THEM INTO NEXT CENTURY!!
Right - but that still went up through their civil rights court and was the first time it had been tried.
The SC smacked it down and said you’re not balancing the rights properly here and he effectively won.
Doing it AGAIN - on the same basis - is absolute persecution.
I could be mistaken, but I think it is ‘legal’ for a baker to state a policy that he can refuse do produce certain themes if he chooses to do so.
Sort of like it is in California for employment, in that some businesses have the right to fire you without cause.
California is an “At Will” state. As long as they pay you what is now owed, they can drop you at any time and for any reason.
I honestly don’t understand why someone can’t refuse business to anyone for any reason. Otherwise, we are not free; we are slaves.
Someone please explain???
I am not a lawyer but there must be some who can start playing the game like the liberals do. Start suing them for everything. Walk in to a DMV and tell them you are a man and the second they give you a license te them you changed your mind and are a woman. Sue them for discrimination. These activists need to meet a scorched earth response. Destroy them.
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.