Originally published on August 21, 2018 on Blogger.
The Left hound Christian baker Jack Phillips for declining to bake a custom-ordered cake for a homosexual couple, claiming that the baker engaged in sex discrimination, although a privately-owned enterprise presumably has the right to deny service to a customer.
But the same Left have no problems with privately-owned businesses such as WordPress, Facebook and Twitter discriminate against conservatives and Christians by banning, censoring, and “suspending” their accounts. See:
- WordPress closed us down, again
- WordPress Matt Mullenweg’s Ministry of Truth
- Who’s behind the tsunami of social media and blog censorship?
On June 4, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled 7:2 in favor of Jack Phillips, the Christian owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado who had declined to create a custom wedding cake for homosexual couple David Mullins and Charlie Craig, by concluding that a state agency, Colorado Civil Rights Commission, discriminated against Phillips by not applying anti-discrimination law in a neutral manner. (The Daily Caller)
Sadly, Phillips’ sense of relief was woefully short-lived because the Left have redoubled their harassment and attack:
(1) On the very day that the Supreme Court agreed to review Phillips’ case, an attorney named Autumn Scardina called Masterpiece Cakeshop to ask Phillips create a custom cake celebrating his “transgender” sex transition. Scardina specified that the cake must have a blue exterior and a pink interior, a reflection of Scardina’s transgender identity. Phillips declined to create the cake, given his religious conviction that gender is immutable, and offered instead to sell Scardina other pre-made baked goods.
(2) In the months that followed,the bakery received requests for cakes featuring marijuana use, sexually explicit messages, Satanic symbols, and a three-tiered white cake depicting Satan licking a functional 9-inch dildo. Phillips believes Scardina made all these requests.
(3) Scardina filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission (CCRC), alleging discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Three weeks after the June 5 Supreme Court ruling in favor of Phillips, CCRC issued a probable cause determination, finding there was sufficient evidence to support Scardina’s claim of discrimination and that Phillips is, once again, in violation of state law.
On August 14, 2018, Phillips filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, accusing the Commission of violating his constitutional free exercise, free speech, due process, and equal protection rights. His attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) say the Commission has revived its campaign against Phillips following June’s Supreme Court decision, singling Masterpiece Cakeshop out for disparate treatment on the basis of Phillips’ religious beliefs.
Kristen Waggoner, an Alliance Defending Freedom attorney who represents Jack Phillips, said:
“The state of Colorado is ignoring the message of the U.S. Supreme Court by continuing to single out Jack for punishment and to exhibit hostility toward his religious beliefs. Even though Jack serves all customers and simply declines to create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events in violation of his deeply held beliefs, the government is intent on destroying him — something the Supreme Court has already told it [Colorado Civil Rights Commission] not to do.”
Phillips’ lawsuit reads:
“Colorado has renewed its war against him [Jack Phillips] by embarking on another attempt to prosecute him, in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s ruling in his favor. This lawsuit is necessary to stop Colorado’s continuing persecution of Phillips.”
- Requests an injunction barring further prosecutions of Phillips for violations of Colorado’s anti-discrimination law, a declaration that the Commission violated his constitutional rights, and damages from the director of the commission, Aubrey Elenis, whom the lawsuit holds to be personally liable for any financial judgment the court might award. Phillips is seeking damages from Elenis for lost work time, lost profits, emotional distress, and reputational harm. He is also requesting an additional $100,000 punitive judgment against her.
- Challenges the criteria by which commissioners are selected to serve on the civil rights panel, arguing that the criteria are not neutral. According to the lawsuit, the seven-member Commission must always include four “members of groups of people who have been or who might be discriminated against because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, marital status, religion, or age.” In this manner, embedded into “the very structure that Colorado uses to enforce its public-accommodation law” is hostility to Phillips’ religious beliefs.
- Challenges a provision of Colorado law that prohibits Phillips from conveying his religious objections to prospective customers, by making it illegal for companies to indicate that protected persons will not be served at their place of business. Phillips’ lawsuit maintains that the law prevents Phillips from communicating his refusal to create custom goods conveying messages, and that a particular clause of the law is unconstitutionally vague because it forbids advertisements indicating “that an individual’s patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable because of … sexual orientation.”
Source: The Daily Caller
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the
Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!