DC:
A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court appeared sympathetic Tuesday with a Christian baker from Colorado who declined to create a custom wedding cake for an LGBT couple.
Several justices expressed concerns about the integrity of civil rights and public accommodations laws, and the Court generally struggled with the proposition that Phillips has a speech interest in his custom cakes. But Justice Anthony Kennedy and the conservative justices expressed concern about government hostility to religious believers, signaling a potential victory for the baker.
The case was occasioned when David Mullins and Charlie Craig, a gay couple, entered Jack Phillips’ Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colo. After a short discussion with the prospective patrons, Phillips said he would not sell them a custom wedding cake due to his deeply-held religious beliefs. Mullins and Craig filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, prompting a lengthy legal battle culminating in an appeal to the high court.
Phillips says he has sold baked goods to LGBT persons in the past, and that he would similarly sell generic baked goods — including cakes — to Mullins and Craig. He refuses, however, to create a custom cake conveying a message respecting their nuptials, and argues the state cannot compel him to create speech with which he disagrees.
I wouldn’t get my hopes up that the Supreme Court will rule in Phillip’s favor. Too many of the justices, apparently including Roberts now, favor the power of the state over any rights of the individual.
The Supremes made themselves irrelevant when they seated Kagan and Sotomayor and allowed the Executive to get away with its opprobrious usurpation and negation of our Constitution through the nationalization and socialization of the Health Industry, known as ObolaCare. Three instances, out of many, which will forever live in infamy.
Thus, they loudly and vociferously proclaimed themselves nothing more than political hacks and lick-spittles – denigrating their “necessity” in a Republic of Free Men.
A Klown-Kouncil who repeatedly be-klown themselves while demanding to be taken seriously. We really have become absurd.
izlamo delenda est …
I just don’t understand why any couple would want someone involved in their wedding in any way if that person disagreed with the marriage! I have not attended weddings of couples that I didn’t think should be married. I was blunt but kind with them on why I didn’t want to attend/send wedding gift etc. Most often it was because I didn’t think the couple was serious about the marriage (they wanted a big party), sometimes it was on religious reasons. Some respected my decision and some cut me out of their lives. However in most cases I was right – the couple separated/divorced within a couple of years – they should never have been married to begin with.
Straight folks have rights, too. It isn’t rocket appliance.
Let’s not count chickens before they are hatched…
Wouldn’t it be a simple solution for every “religious”/conservative cake baker to
have a sign in his store which states,
“We proudly make all our
gay and lesbian wedding cakes
only with 100% feces!”
and be done with it?!
If they choose not to buy that cake,
well, that’s *their* choice, now, isn’t it?!?
At what point did the Feds think it was their business to get involved in the economy in the first place?
And let me guess: these two butt hurt fags could not get a cake anywhere else? Or did they intentionally target a Christian for the purpose of picking a fight?
The coercive power of the State must be stopped. No Free Citizen can be compelled to do or say ANYTHING against his will. Cakes, shmakes! “We must obey God as ruler rather than men!” This wedding cake issue is just sugar-frosted Fascism.
This was a setup from the beginning. Why did they not go to another bakery? Just two azz soles trying to force everyone to submit to the LBGTXYZ agenda. In Colorado they can learn to plat hockey and puck themselves!
Why do gays always feel it’s all about them?
This isn’t about rights, the Christian has rights too.
It’s about power to control, power that is increasingly being used to punish people for “thought crimes”.
Lenin approves, from his pedestal in Seattle.
Deep thoughts…..by Mithrandir….
⬛ When is a non-Christian going to be compelled to preform services against their religion?
⬛ Can you deny people services based on religion for everything? Or is it just specific behavior? Can everyone refuse a Christian from entering a store based on their opposing values? Deny selling them a car? Credit card?
⬛ Is it REALLY a good idea to challenge and upset people who prepare your FOOD? Do you trust eating it? What if you get hepatitis? Can you prove they deliberately tainted the food or they just didn’t wash their hands well enough?
Judgeroybean, you hit the nail right on the head!
There must be gay bakers or others who would not have a concern with such an order.
Isn’t FORCING someone to perform an act for a sexual deviant considered sexual harassment or molestation?
I have as much faith in the Supreme Court as I do the 9th Circuit Court, DOJ, FBI, ATF, IRS, EPA, Mueller, and etc., etc.
Public opinion and political correctness outweighs Constitutional Rights for the Majority of the political hacks in the Judiciary at the State and Federal levels.
What about the signs that say “We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone”?
Joe6:
“No shirt, no shoes, no butt-fucking”
The issue is fairly clear.
“Do rights the Supreme Court INFERS from the Constitution supersede rights CLEARLY SET FORTH in the Constitution?
It should be clear that the answer is a resounding “NO!”
There’s a difference between denying service because someone is gay and denying a specific kind of service involving actual speech (spoken/written word or obvious artistic theme) that the merchant finds offensive.
If a black woman walks into the bakery and demands a cake saying “All White Men are Scum” and the baker refuses to make the cake, can he be sued because the customer is black or a woman and that white men are not a specifically protected group? This is a perfect example of why identity politics is shit, and the second the courts forced the constitution to be wrapped around the notion of special protections for anointed classes of people specified by democrats, the entire concept of tolerance and justice went completely to shit.
What if the Baker fucks the dough? Is that OK to make into a fag cake?
Do you really want people around your food who find you repugnant?
Seems kinda stupid to me …
izlamo delenda est …
If I had a bakery and was asked to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding, i would agree to do it and then “lose” the order. I would happily refund the deposit, after this unfortunate situation.