Posted on 04/30/2016 5:34:13 AM PDT by marshmallow
Denver, Colo., Apr 29, 2016 / 12:08 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The lawyers of the bakery owner who made headlines for declining to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding is “evaluating all legal options” to preserve the man’s First Amendment rights after the state’s highest court declined to take the case.
“We asked the Colorado Supreme Court to take this case to ensure that government understands that its duty is to protect the people’s freedom to follow their beliefs personally and professionally, not force them to violate those beliefs as the price of earning a living,” Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Jeremy Tedesco said in an April 25 statement.
On April 25 the Colorado Supreme Court declined to review an earlier decision from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission requiring Jack Phillips and his staff at Masterpiece Cakeshop to undergo re-education training and file quarterly compliance reports for two years.
“Jack, who has happily served people of all backgrounds for years, simply exercised the long-cherished American freedom to decline to use his artistic talents to promote a message and event with which he disagrees, and that freedom shouldn’t be placed in jeopardy for anyone,” Tedesco continued.
Now Alliance Defending Freedom, a nonprofit legal organization that advocates for the rights of citizens to live out their faith freely, says that they are “evaluating all legal options to preserve this freedom for Jack.”
The baker made headlines when in 2012 he declined to bake a wedding cake for a couple’s same-sex wedding ceremony, citing his religious beliefs about gay marriage in an exchange that lasted less than a minute, according to Phillips. The baker told the clients he’d gladly make them any other kind of cake, just not one celebrating their same-sex marriage.
At the time, same-sex marriage was not legally recognized......
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
If I'd been a ticket holder I'd sued for breach of contract.
If this guy's attorney is smart he would be pursuing this line of argument.
I have noticed that even really good lawyers for conservatives can argue a case from the perspective of the homoFascists. This is a loosing strategy. They should undo the false narrative of the enemy and put to rights the real nature of the issue.
The marriage debate is no different. Attorneys try to argue for the "right for children to have a mother and father," but that's not the central issue at all, although enormously important. That issue springs from the ontology of marriage, what it IS in its substance.
The case transcripts are available for your review.
I haven’t seen any summaries suggesting ineffective representation.
I'm not impugning the competency of the defense in this particular case, but in general. The arguments used by the defendants in numerous marriage cases fell flat, because they were shooting at the wrong targets, even though they hit them.
>> the Constitution and the rule of law has become a thing of the past.
Per Romans chapter1, Nature eventually always overrules those who “thinking themselves wise, became fools”.
Good news for retired/unemployed N. Vietnamese Re-education Camp Commandants & Guards. Jobs await you in Colorado!
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.