Skip to comments.Crumbling Freedom: (Colorado) Cake Artist Sent to 'Reeducation'
Posted on 07/29/2014 8:14:09 AM PDT by xzins
LAKEWOOD, Colo. -- Imagine being ordered to go against your religious beliefs, and if you refuse, you could be arrested, fined, or sued.
That happened to the Christian owner of a Colorado bakery who now must make wedding cakes for gay couples.
However, the owner is standing his ground and his action is inspiring people around the world.
The sign on the door reads "Celebrating 20 Years of Great Cakes!" For two decades, Masterpiece Cakeshop has created art in the form of baked goods that keeps customers coming back.
From cookies and cupcakes to signature cakes, Jack Phillips and his daughter Lisa have transformed their bakery into a studio. Phillips said it's all inspired and motivated by his faith in Jesus Christ.
"It's the most important thing that I think about throughout the day. When I wake up, when I go to work, I want to know that what I'm doing is pleasing to Him, that I honor Him and His Word because that's the most important thing," Phillips said.
But Phillips' Christian faith landed him in trouble with the law. His crime: adhering to his biblical belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
In 2012, a homosexual couple sued the baker after he declined to make a cake to celebrate their marriage. An administrative law judge ruled against him, and the Colorado Civil Rights Commission agreed.
The commission stated Phillips' refusal went against the state's public accommodation law. It requires businesses to serve customers regardless of their sexual orientation.
In a public statement, one member of the Civil Rights Commission said, "I can believe anything I want, but if I'm going to do business here, I'd ought to not discriminate against people."
"I didn't discriminate against anybody," Phillips countered. "Like Nicolle (his attorney) said, I've chosen not to make cakes for same-sex weddings. I told David and Charlie when they came in that I would sell them cookies and brownies and birthday cakes and shower cakes. I just don't do the same-sex wedding cake. So I did not discriminate against them, just that event I've chosen not to participate in."
His attorney Nicolle Martin said the Commission violated his First Amendment rights. She's taken the case to the Colorado Court of Appeals.
Conform to Comply
The Civil Rights Commission's order requires Phillips and his staff to make cakes for same-sex celebrations if asked.
He must also re-educate his staff about Colorado's Anti-Discrimination Act. Under that law, artists must endorse all views.
The order also requires him to put in place new policies to comply with the Commission's order.
In addition, he will submit quarterly "compliance" reports to the government for two years.
According to Alliance Defending Freedom, the reports must include the number of customers declined a wedding cake or any other product. They must also include why it was declined "so to ensure he has fully eliminated his religious beliefs from his business."
"The government has chosen which message it favors in this case; I think the state has made it very clear," Martin said.
"Jack's First Amendment rights, Jack's freedom to express himself or more importantly, not express himself, must bow to the complainants' message," she said. "And all I can say is what that looks like to me is something very frightening, and that's nothing more than diversity through conformity, and that's not diversity at all," she added.
First Amendment Disappearing?
Phillips' case is one of a handful in which complainants sued private businesses for refusing to accommodate gay couples getting married.
It also helped lead to controversial proposals in several states allowing businesses to decline service based on the religious beliefs of owners.
"This case is not about and it has never been about the young men that came in here almost two years ago asking Jack to design and create their cake," Martin said. "This case has always been about the message that that cake expresses, what that cake communicates."
"It's surprising," Phillips said. "This is not what they taught us in civics class... they could do this to you. They do this in other countries, not here."
"So Jack stands on the First Amendment. In this case, we're going to learn whether the First Amendment has a future in America," Martin said.
In a country founded on freedom of religion and speech, that's a future important to all Americans
It is hard to believe that this will pass constitutional muster when it finally gets into the federal court system.
But requiring the man to report that his beliefs have been eliminated from his business is not even trying to be subtle.
This evil - the idea that individuals must obey all government commands regardless of their personal beliefs and that some religious beliefs are unacceptable - was underground for 70 years, but it’s back. National Socialists disgusted me long ago, and today’s socialists still disgust me. I miss the rule of law.
The Epitome of Leftist Religious Tolerance: None for Christians.
While I don’t agree with the decision, I don’t understand why the shop owners don’t make a hidious cake for these customers. The customers can then either take the cake, or walk.
I don’t see this as a big deal.
$500 for all homo cakes with “special seasonings” and $25 for all hetero cakes.
You can always fail the exam.
It’s not a big deal because it didn’t happen to you. A private business ought to do business how and with whomever he wants.
He should stop doing wedding cakes for anyone. Instead he could make a plain white stacked- layer cake. The customer can decorate it anyway they wish, and he could not be charged with discrimination by the ungodly sodomites.
The suggestion that he sell them brownies was funny, though.
“While I dont agree with the decision, I dont understand why the shop owners dont make a hidious cake for these customers. The customers can then either take the cake, or walk.”
Do you own a small business? I do, and I take pride in the quality of the work I do and consider it a reflection of my character.
The crux of this issue is the State forcing this businessman to abandon his beliefs, How would abandoning his pride of workmanship be a remedy?
Over the past several months, I have seen federal judge after federal judge strike down state laws and amendments declaring marriage to be between a man and a woman.
I expect these same judges to rule against THIS man and force him into the reeducation camp.
FAGGOTS Uber Alles.
It’s really quite absurd and judges are on the wrong side.
So much for “Reserving the right to refuse service...” I don’t care if it IS your business, that you worked to develop. It’s not your business, or your home, if someone else can tell you what you can or can’t do, or require a permit, or...
Let them eat........cake!
In a way, I’m glad cases like this come up, because they expose the left for the tyrants they are, notwithstanding the burdens placed upon Mr. Phillips. Sometimes we are called to witness in the weirdest ways, but when called, see it for what it is and must fear not.
The Civil Rights Commission’s order requires Phillips and his staff to make cakes for same-sex celebrations if asked.
We used to call this Involuntary Servitude
So if two people came in and wanted a wedding cake done to celebrate their Muslim vows, will he do it? If they come in wanting a wedding cake that praised Satan, would they do it?
It would be worth it to have some other test cases come to his shop just to show that his refusal goes beyond simply homosexuals. That this is just “one of a group” of cakes he would refuse to do.
He should also partner with another business that would have no such objections and refer those customers to that other business, including handing them that partner’s business card. In that sense, they are not refusing the request but redirecting the request.
Now, let’s say that a person performed wedding music instead of baked cakes and they had strong anti-Catholic views. Would the state of Colorado *compel* these musicians to perform at a Catholic wedding? If the answer is “no”, tell me the difference between objecting to wedding cakes and objecting to wedding music? How is it in the state’s interest to override the views, religious or not, of those who are asked to violate their own beliefs?
And you expect the shop owners to eat the bill each time customers do not accept their product and walk?