Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Sunday, December 17, 2017

Is it Really Just About the Cake?

By Thornton Crowe

Imagine a society where photographers, web designers and videographers were forced by law, to work for the porn industry. And should they choose not to accept these clients, they can be sued out of business!

The media would have you believe this cake baker suit before the Supreme Court is a pristine example of discrimination against the LGBT community, but that's simply rubbish.

America, if you remember, was started by many groups with a variety of reasons. Some came here to exploit the new land for money, while others came here because they were criminals in exile. However, one of the big reasons for the Northeastern colonies was a group escaping religious oppression in England. They didn't want to be aligned with the King's Church of England. They sought religious freedom, to worship the way they saw fit. Hence, why this right is very first Amendment in our Constitution! Make sense?

Whether a same-sex marriage or not, this case isn't about cake - it's about freedom of religion and speech...

The case could very well turn out to be our contemporary Roe v. Wade because it will determine whether or not business owners have a right to refuse service based on their personal conscience and beliefs. Not only does this hit the Religious Freedom, it also touches Free Speech. Christian baker Jack Phillips has turned this seemingly nuisance case into a legitimate fight to retain our First Amendment Constitutional right!

Show us the legal damages... or is it just a way for judicial activism to persecute Christians?


In reality, the same-sex couple had several other choices but they chose to make a big hoopla out of this one baker refusing service. Sounds like politics was more important to Charlie Craig and David Mullins than their wedding. Its always suspect when cases like this go to court because people - especially liberals - like to use the justice system as a method to validate their lifestyle or highlight some perceived injustice instead of what the court system is designed to do: find remedies for injured (civil suit) parties.

Frankly, the fact Phillips didn't bake their cake leaves no real injury for Craig and Mullins because they did get married. Hence, this begs one has to wonder why this case wasn't dismissed on the lower court level. In short, this is nothing more than judicial activism trying to, once again, dictate behavior through legal machinations.

Food for Thought: The same law that now protects a lesbian waitress for refusing service to that crazy gay-hating Westboro church member also protects Christians from baking cakes they don't want to make!

The oral arguments were heard last Tuesday and Justice Kennedy's questioning Colorado's tolerance toward Phillips is a good sign he's leaning towards his Constitution-loving contemporaries. Many have legal speculation has predicted we're looking at a 5-4 vote in the baker's favor, so let's keep the faith!

Fundamental disagreement does not constitute discrimination... 

And that, my friends, is the true nexus of this case!

We should thank our lucky stars for a patriot like Jack Phillips, who had the perseverance and wherewithal to take this all the way to the Supreme Court instead of just lying down and taking the tyrannical opinion of the Colorado court system. It would've been so very easy to do the latter, indeed!

How say you?

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

A lot of peeps today don't give a crap about the constitution. They have no clue what it says or why it was written. You're expecting people to wrap their heads around something so abstract, it can't be fathomable.

Anonymous said...

People are programmed by liberal media and democrats to not respect other people's religious beliefs. They couldn't care less if what they want is not acceptable for someone else. This gay couple who brought this suit were abusing the legal system but the CO court system allowed them to abuse it. Hope the Supreme Court continues to smack down on the liberal jurists. It's long overdue.

Anonymous said...

It is a shame that you have to lie to follow your religion. The baker could have just said, sorry we are booked up can't help you. Pity that being honest is not a virtue anymore.

Anonymous said...

Oh the melting pot we live in. Excellent article TC. Cake this time with the Supreme's, maybe a salutation next time??

Whatever it might be, one thing is for sure - 5 days until TGIF! If the day comes and that changes - Katie better be bar that door!!!!

Anonymous said...

If a person has his own business. He started that business on his own. Most business owners go through a lot of sacrificing and hard times and long hours to get established. It is his business and he should have the right to refuse anyone he wants for any reason. The government or the legal system or no one else should be able to dictate how anyone should run their own business. This is just common sense in a free country.

Anonymous said...

958 you are exactly right, it is a shame people are forced to lie about their beliefs to avoid lawsuits and/or ridicule. That's why this case is very important for everyone who desires freedom to be who they are without fear of recourse.

Anonymous said...

Where are all the bible thumpers? They can talk trash on every other post but not this one? WOW!

Anonymous said...

9:41, I beg to differ with your opinion on the Constitution's understandability. The Constitution was written in very simple and plain language so that everyone could understand what it said and with what intent it was written, and I find that is still true today. My pocket copy of the document is 2 1/2 inches x 5 inches and is only 47 pages long, including all the Amendments, unlike the 2,500 pages of 8 1/2 x 11 inches of Obamacare that Pelosi had to pass "just to find out what is in it" because anybody trying to read it before it got pushed through would have incurred permanent eye and psychological damage!

Sorry, but I LOVE my Constitution and can pop it out of my pocket and help you with it any time!

Anonymous said...

1000 if you're living your life just to get to each friday then you'll have a most abbreviated life. Every day is a gift to be used wisely.

Anonymous said...

11:02 its good you care about the constitution but many in this area don't. That's what I was saying. Look at the comments. Most people don't know how to even discuss this subject because they're so afraid of social retaliation. Boo-hoo. It's time we started taking this country back from the liberals who whine and cry about every little thing.

JCM said...

I Submit:-

If the baker was an LGBTQ artist running their shop and a straight couple
wanted a cake with a specific message on it... Would the outcome be the
same??? would that instance end up in the SCOTUS, with the eventual
outcome be an dictate for the nation??
Just thinking.... ???

Anonymous said...

Maybe if the LGBT community would quit trying to jam their sexuality down everyone's throats, they wouldn't get the resistance as much as they do now. They are their own crown of thorns.

Anonymous said...

With these gays it's not about anything other then showing off. They are forever showing off because they think it will make a name for themselves. Yes they are making a name for themselves and that name is just how truly vile, perverted and nasty they are. Just as said there are plenty of other bakers who would do a cake but gays being gays can't stop with that showing off they love to do and make a big scene and seek to destroy good people. They last laugh will be on them when the perverts are spending eternity burning in hell for getting their perverse sexual pleasures off of ways that are against God.

Anonymous said...

I don't begrudge same-sex couples from having weddings or wedding cake, but they shouldn't try to force their lifestyle choices on anyone who doesn't embrace their choice. Taking something like this to court was asinine to begin with but what's more asinine was the Colorado courts who let it go through. Judges can refuse cases they find meritless and you can't get more meritless than this one. Like Crowe said, it should have been dismissed.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like lawyers trying turn a quick buck.

Anonymous said...

12:19 PM you failed to add religion to the narrative, which is the point. Muslim bakeries refuse to make gay cakes and they don't end up being sued so why did the white christian? I submit. Compare apples to apples.

Anonymous said...

Ditto 10:11 !!

Mr. Phillips should have a cake baked in his honor for standing his ground.
Had I been in his position I would have handed the pair a couple of cupcakes on the house and wished them well.
As stated before it seems this issue is not about a wedding, but attention.
Had I been in their position, I would have thanked Mr. Phillips for his time and gone to the next bake shop.
But I'm a simple man.

Anonymous said...

Thank God & Trump for Gorsuch!

Anonymous said...

It's fantastic the Supreme Court took this case. There was an earlier lawsuit which bankrupted the baker so it's great Phillips had to the balls and money to take it all the way. Its time activist stopped imposing some people's decisions on everyone else. It's about TIME!

Can't wait to hear the opinion. Thornton, please let us know what they decide!

Anonymous said...

People don't care until their rights are taken away, then they're all up in arms. See all the anti-cigarette smoking sentiment got you people? It was a slippery slope from that point forward.

Anonymous said...

9:41 add to your spot on comment activist judges who decide cases based on ideology.

Anonymous said...

It was framed as being for the public good but it ended up empowering liberals to start eroding other rights. That’s what happens when you fall fool to law’s that take away rights.

Anonymous said...

Judicial activism is actually a violation of the oath judges take to uphold and protect the Constitution. In reality, Roe v. Wade was as the result of judicial activism as there’s nothing in the Constitution regarding abortion or anything close to it. The same holds true with Brown v. Board of Education. The Amendments do not address either scenario or premise. Therefore, both were judicial activism. Legislating from the bench which in part makes a judge trying to establish him or herself as above the law. Not their purvey at all.

Anonymous said...

12:27 is absolutely correct. The LGBTQXYZ Gender-benders won't be happy until their deviant behavior becomes mainstream.

Anonymous said...

Actually a person’s sexuality should be their own business. What should be mainstream 345, is for both gays and straight people to stop meddling into each others’ privately held beliefs. Both are wrong to impose their sexual choices on others. For example, I would be just as upset for Salisbury Downtown being closed for a straight wedding as I was for Ms. Glanz wedding last year because it’s inconsiderate of the business owners who pay rent to have their businesses there.

Anonymous said...

Phillips didn’t say he was against gays getting married, he said he could not bake their cake due to his religious beliefs. That’s his prerogative and not taking away from the gay person’s right to get married. There are no damages here.

Anonymous said...

When you have to violate someone else's rights and values so that you feel equal when you could just shop elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

Gay marriage wasn't even legal in Colorado at the time. That is why they were going to Mass. or somewhere to get married but they were going to have a reception at home in Colorado. If the state didn't even recognize the marriage as being legal how can they then force the baker to bake a cake to support it?

Anonymous said...

So under the liberals new law the KKK could force a black family owned catering service to serve them food in full regalia?
All business transactions are a contract, even if it is unwritten, for an exchange of goods or services for money. You can not force someone into a contract. This will lead to jerks behaving badly and business not being able to refuse service because the individual is hiding behind some "protected class".

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it’s time we did away with protected classes. The time for that has long past and it’s time equality was distributed equally.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why we have embraced the LGBT when it is disgusting and immoral , it is against the BIBLE and all of the Christian religion. It is another form of cancer . We do have a cure for this cancer and we should use
it . The main cancer is democrats , liberals and on down , so many people affected now it's out of hand like the black plague.(liberal would be the fleas)

Anonymous said...

And this is exactly why Trump is president. AND why in the 8 yrs that other pervert obama was in office the GOP won more seats in not only the Congress but in governorships. The GOP also controls more state houses then ever before AND both governmorships AND state houses. Not only are these homosexuals dirty and nasty in what they do and how they think they are also extremely ignorant. That is the blessing and can only be said to be divine intervention. Too dumb to see their actions are only helping the GOP to take over most of the country. For their stupidity they are to be thanked. I remember seeing them crying like the little sissies they are when Clinton LOST. Little sissies get their feelings hurt when someone won't bake them a cake. Grow a set you homosexuals and go somewhere else like a man would do. Get some real pride and stop acting like little girls. So gross seeing a grown man shining like a little girl.

Anonymous said...

No need to throw pearls to the swine...