Supreme Court sides with baker in same-sex wedding case


We are friends with the gay community. (We refuse to use the LBGTQI jargon, half because it changes every other week.) But this guy has a business and should be able to refuse business based on his conscience. Should a Jewish baker be forced to make a cake with a swastika on it? I think most people would say no. Likewise should a black baker be forced to make a cake with a Klansman on it? No.

The reasonable response is that these images above represent “hate” whereas a rainbow flag, or a gay couple holding hands or whatever, does not. But that misses the point and “hate” is a very relative thing. This is his business. He should be able to make the call. He is not refusing these people’s business per se because of who they are. He is refusing to create something that violates his conscience. I’ll bet he would have been happy to make all sorts of other cakes for these customers.

The Supreme Court made the right decision here. Though some are arguing it didn’t go far enough.

(From The Hill)

In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated the free exercise clause of the Constitution when it forced Jack Phillips to make a cake for a same-sex wedding he morally opposed under the state’s public accommodations law.

“The laws and the Constitution can, and in some instances must, protect gay persons and gay couples in the exercise of their civil rights, but religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression,” the majority opinion said.

“While it is unexceptional that Colorado law can protect gay persons in acquiring products and services on the same terms and conditions as are offered to other member of the public, the law must be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion.”

Click here for the article.