Posted on 08/21/2015 3:05:22 AM PDT by markomalley
Just in case you need a refresher: Back in 2012, a baker in the Denver suburb of Lakewood was asked by a gay couple to make them a wedding cake — two years before gay marriage was even legalized in Colorado. The owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Jack Phillips, declined to participate in Charlie Craig and David Mullins’ celebration because such an event conflicted with his Christian faith.
Here are a few things Phillips didn’t do: He didn’t query consumers about their sexual preferences. He didn’t bar same-sex couples from purchasing a cake at a place of public accommodation. He didn’t ask consumers traveling in same-sex pairs to leave his shop. He didn’t hang a “No Gays Allowed” sign in his window.
What he could never have known when he first opened his shop was that celebrating gay marriages would be a precondition for making a living. And when you consider that there are at least a few dozen other bakeries within a short drive from Masterpiece Cakeshop that could have accommodated the couple’s celebratory pastry needs, why would he?
Yet instead of exhibiting a basic level of tolerance (or dignity), two priggish bullies decided to call the authorities when Phillips refused to bake them a cake. And the cultural commissars at the Colorado Civil Rights Commission soon ruled that he had discriminated against the couple.
The shop was not only ordered to alter store policy and start baking cakes for gay weddings — or else face debilitating fines, a consequence often reported on by the media — but also forced to provide comprehensive staff training, ensure compliance, and then file quarterly obedience reports with the government for two years. In these reports, Phillips has to describe exactly which remedial measures the shop has taken to conform and document the reasons any other patrons were denied service.
So, you know, I’m sure this is exactly how Thomas Jefferson imagined America would turn out when he was writing the Declaration of Independence.
Phillips appealed the decision, and a three-panel Colorado Court of Appeals unanimously decided that Masterpiece Cakeshop’s policy against creating wedding cakes for same-sex couples was a “discriminatory and unfair practice,” further ruling that the shop must continue to answer to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission or else be run out of business.
Incredibly, the court acknowledged in its decision that it would have looked at the First Amendment arguments more closely had the gay couple ordered a cake with some explicit messaging that advocated gay marriage. In other words, the Colorado Court of Appeals believes that the threshold for denying religious liberty is the presence of advocacy. The court has effectively tasked itself with determining for you when religion should matter.
If nothing else, it’s comforting to know that Colorado can force an orthodox Muslim butcher to make sausages for a polyamorous, bisexual bachelor/bachelorette party, as long as no one asks the butcher to outwardly promote swine and free love.
In any event, I’m sure there will be an appeal. But seeing as most Americans are fine with gay marriage and simultaneously put off by unpleasant (though deceptive, in this case) words such as “discrimination” and “prejudice,” the courts — nearly always driven by the vagaries of public opinion — will find a way to force all to comply. This will go for any other businesses even tangentially related to weddings, such as food catering, music, and so on. And the crusade will accelerate until the legal lynch mob gets to religious institutions. No doubt advocates will work backward to come up with a great legal rationalization for all of it.
All of this is not to say that in American life, the minority should never be compelled to surrender to some form of majoritarianism, judicial force, or government. In this case, though, the minority does not have the ability to compromise without abandoning its faith. The other side refuses to compromise precisely because of this reality. And courts and commissions around the country are willing to destroy businesses — businesses that sometimes took a large part of a lifetime to build — by ignoring one of the most vital functions of the First Amendment.
The position of these businesspeople, unlike Southern racists decades ago, in no way undermines the newfound right of gay Americans to marry, nor does it inhibit them from enjoying freedom or finding happiness. In this case, only one side is attempting to legislate morality.
If you admit — and many rational people do, even those who quarrel with the reasoning behind religious obstinacy — that millions of Christians hold some form of a genuine, long-standing religious conviction that prohibits them from celebrating gay marriages but you still support state coercion against them, then you might as well just concede that religious freedom isn’t compatible with your conception of a contemporary society.
Whereas at one time the state wouldn’t substantially burden religious exercise and would use the least restrictive means to further “compelling interests,” the state today is inclined to substantially burden a Christian by the mere fact that someone’s feelings are hurt.
What say you Justice Kennedy?
Without a doubt, he would disqualify authentically Christian churches from being legitimate religions worthy of 1st Amendment protections.
For individuals, he'd undoubtedly say that Christians have "freedom of conscience" as long as they keep it to themselves. But if they open their mouths, they need to be shipped to sensitivity training camps for re-education.
Stay calm and carry on.
Religious freedom, river spill, wildfires ...perhaps God is trying to get their attention. Just a thought.
They’d have to just throw me in jail before I would attend any forcd “diversity training” to sit there and be told that my religious principles are wrong, especially when they’re founded on thousands of years of Biblical interpretation.
close down. form a new corporation. re open.
Hurt feelings, maybe. Butthurt for sure.
Discrimination is the essence of life. It is a basic fundamental God given right. Without it...
For individuals, he'd undoubtedly say that Christians have "freedom of conscience" as long as they keep it to themselves. But if they open their mouths, they need to be shipped to sensitivity training camps for re-education.
Why are we always crying about the First Amendment for Christians. What if I simply have an objection to the unnatural perverse behavior of homosexuals. Don't I have a First Amendment right?
Exactly. I would have never let it get this far. My Dad ran a small business. One of his employees - on company time, in a company truck - decided to have a couple on the way back to the shop. Ended up DUI and wrecking the truck. He wanted Dad to pay workers comp for his injuries. Dad managed enough self control not to put him back in the hospital. But he told him in no uncertain terms (as a kid I learned a few new words) that he'd rather close the business immediately, that day, than pay that {deleted} one more dime.
43.0 grains H335 behind the 150 gr PSP bullet for 7.62 NATO.........
Pardon me. Still reloading here.
43.0 grains H335 behind the 150 gr PSP bullet for 7.62 NATO.........
Pardon me. Still reloading here.
Note well that the First Amendment does not protect just the right to believe as one chooses, but to engage in the free EXERCISE of one’s beliefs. So the ruling in Obergfell is constitutionally unsound since it in effect endorses the silent and unobtrusive framework of a belief system, but bars its actual practice.
There will be additional cases brought before the Court, arguing this thesis, and the decision will turn on whether the rights of an individual (or establishment) to practice his religion override the rights of other individuals to bugger each other and then force others to celebrate it.
I’ve read the US Constitution many times. I don’t recall seeing anything in it that states anyone has the right to not have their feelings hurt.
Of course the Constitution would have to matter once again for that to make a difference. Well news flash: IT MATTERS TO ME! So piss off liberal whiney ass wimps.
Did a quick word search on my text version of the Constitution.
Couldn’t find “hurt feelings” anywhere.
HA!
I’m stopping by their shop to pick up a cake tonight to be auctioned off at a GOP fundraiser tomorrow.
It might actually be worth going, especially if they pull the old line, “class confidentiality”. Give them both barrels of the gospel and make them kick you out.
“hurt feelings” are an element used by progressives to manufacture strategic “perception” as they seek to consolidate and strengthen their numbers in the corporate/collective environment.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-25/how-companies-are-using-pip-humiliate-and-get-rid-workers
How’s your body language?
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.