As offensive as critical race theory is, I agree that government forcing private businesses not to make it part of their training is a step too far. However, I do think it needs to be kept out of the school system. It is harmful to children, no matter which race the child.
What would the Colorado Civil Rights Commission do if it were a Muslim baker?? I know! I know! He wouldn't bake the cake either and they wouldn't do diddly squat.
This is the reason why I subscribe. Very well stated. As a small business owner myself, I'd bake the cake and take their money. I do not believe that would be participating in their ceremony. That's MY belief. Jack Phillips, however, believes otherwise and the State should NOT force him at gunpoint to bake their freaking cake. The First Amendment guarantees his right NOT to bake the cake if he feels it violates his religion. Leave the poor guy alone.
I'm just wondering how long it will be before Scardina renews the demands for a "Satanic" themed cake, and then claims religious discrimination because "Satanism is a recognized religion". Because the harassment isn't going to stop until Jack Phillips is driven out of business and bankrupted, or, as Scardina has said from the beginning, "changes his way of thinking".
Exactly; or as Erick says, when Jack Phillips is "made to care", then his legal persecution will end. Or as Paul so succinctly put it, "In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived." 2 Timothy 3: 12-13
I will print this and give to any who claim you're not well informed and well spoken. It seems lawyers DO make good talk radio hosts. When are you coming to Woodstock on tour?
Really grateful for the insights. Difficult time we live in. Remember...despite what happens here, the victory has already been won. Keep that helmet of Salvation on. Use the Shield to deflect the fiery missiles, and remember the sword is one of truth. May we each be given the wisdom and strength to stand in the gap at this time. Satan thought he had won at the cross, not realizing that Death would not stand as victor. The grave is empty, we now walk following Jesus. They hated him. they will hate us. But even as they hate, we pray for them, so that they may see our good works and either will praise God for us, or will confess when every knee will bend. May many who are foes, still be drawn to Jesus while the day of salvation is still available. Even one soul coming to faith is worth all the effort.
I am probably going to get negative comments about this....but, I have a different view on part of this. I agree with Eric that businesses should not get harassed and sued due to religious beliefs or practices. This entire effort against Phillips is a left wing organized stunt for publicity etc. But, what are businesses in business for? Usually to provide a product/service to make money. Are the gay couples asking him to put depictions of homosexual sex acts or of body parts on the cake? If a man goes into the business to buy a cake for his girlfriend....does Phillips ask if he is having pre-marital sex with his girlfriend? What about "self gratification"....which Biblically can be considered a sin. Does Phillips ensure that someone like Jeffrey Toobin does not get a cake? Sin is sin....correct? Where does his religious beliefs begin and end? Does this not make him a hypocrite? Why not just go ahead and bake the cakes and give the money to a Christian church or charity organization? I guess I just think there are more worthy hills to die on.
Thoughtful comments and questions, leaving me some important points to ponder. Perhaps Phillips may be due some grace from us if we agree that none of us are 100% logical, linear, or fully consistent in our pursuit of living and walking in our faith. But, we much earnestly try to live in accordance with our faith beliefs, seek grace from our God for when we stumble, and extend grace as freely as we want to receive it.
On a surface level, I don’t disagree with you. It is one thing to refuse to bake a cake with a particular design; another to refuse to bake any cake if it is going to be taken to an event one disagrees with.
However, it is the government, not private business, that is required to be viewpoint-neutral. Businesses may not refuse to bake cakes for persons, but they are not required to celebrate events which they believe would be a violation of their religious principals.
There are a lot of sticky situations one could imagine here (can they refuse to sell a dozen ready-made cookies if they will be eaten at a gay wedding celebration?), but religious freedom is a bedrock principal of our Constitution and I think we get into trouble if we try to parse it too closely.
FWIW, I disagree vehemently with Phillips’ beliefs, but I defend his right to have them and act on them.
Just to clarify my comment a bit. I do agree that the government should NOT be forcing Phillips or any business owner to sell the cakes. I am just questioning his parameters. Where is the point at which the sin is acceptable to bake the cake. Does his convictions end after homosexuality and divorce/second marriages?
From what I've read, and I've read a lot about it, he serves gay persons, transgender persons, divorced persons, and he doesn't question people about their personal lives. It was only when he was specifically asked to design and create something for an event that he didn't feel he could participate in the celebration of, that the issue arose.
First, when two men asked him to design a cake for "their" wedding. It was unavoidable to him...he either participated in the celebration of something that the Bible condemns, or he had to refuse. He refused. And I don't think he had the slightest inkling that it would turn into all of this, but once he had refused, he either had to knowingly participate, or stand on his principles.
Then, the trap was cleverly laid by Scardina. Had Scardina simply asked for a pink and blue birthday cake, without specifically stating that it was to "celebrate a gender transition", there would have been no problem. If Scardina had merely said it was for a transgender person's birthday, he'd have baked the cake. The trap was to make him participate in the "celebration of gender transition", which he would not do.
You have to realize, that at that point in time, they were getting multiple phone calls and emails requesting cakes with obscene images and Satanic symbols, many of which requests came from Scardina.
But the law DOES allow him to refuse cakes with words and imagery he would not make for anyone...so they couldn't get any traction suing him for that...the trap had to be set to ensure that the cake itself was innocuous, just the event that it was celebrating was one involving a "protected class". Scardina has been quite open about the fact that it was entrapment...and specifically stated it was to force him to "change his way of thinking".
He'll probably be forced to close, but I doubt he's going to "change his thinking".
Wonder if Phillips could counter-sue for harassment.
I'm certainly no lawyer, but I wonder if Phillips might not still win. He would not refuse to sell a cake to this person, regardless of the fact that the person is transgender. The person knew if he told Phillips he was transgender without telling him the specifics of the occasion, that Phillips would still bake the cake. Thus, this person ordered the cake for the express purpose of interfering with Phillips' free exercise of his religion.
I think if it were a stock cake rather than a custom cake, Phillips might have a harder argument to make. But I rather suspect that SCOTUS would rather not get into the game of parsing the exact circumstances of individual commercial orders.
As offensive as critical race theory is, I agree that government forcing private businesses not to make it part of their training is a step too far. However, I do think it needs to be kept out of the school system. It is harmful to children, no matter which race the child.
What would the Colorado Civil Rights Commission do if it were a Muslim baker?? I know! I know! He wouldn't bake the cake either and they wouldn't do diddly squat.
On a different topic………
https://youtu.be/tedKXYiHwzE
Praying for Jack Phillips and his family❤️🙏
This is the reason why I subscribe. Very well stated. As a small business owner myself, I'd bake the cake and take their money. I do not believe that would be participating in their ceremony. That's MY belief. Jack Phillips, however, believes otherwise and the State should NOT force him at gunpoint to bake their freaking cake. The First Amendment guarantees his right NOT to bake the cake if he feels it violates his religion. Leave the poor guy alone.
I’d like to think there’s still such a thing as conservative principles, because it seems Republican principles is an oxymoron.
Well said.
I'm just wondering how long it will be before Scardina renews the demands for a "Satanic" themed cake, and then claims religious discrimination because "Satanism is a recognized religion". Because the harassment isn't going to stop until Jack Phillips is driven out of business and bankrupted, or, as Scardina has said from the beginning, "changes his way of thinking".
Exactly; or as Erick says, when Jack Phillips is "made to care", then his legal persecution will end. Or as Paul so succinctly put it, "In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived." 2 Timothy 3: 12-13
I will print this and give to any who claim you're not well informed and well spoken. It seems lawyers DO make good talk radio hosts. When are you coming to Woodstock on tour?
Really grateful for the insights. Difficult time we live in. Remember...despite what happens here, the victory has already been won. Keep that helmet of Salvation on. Use the Shield to deflect the fiery missiles, and remember the sword is one of truth. May we each be given the wisdom and strength to stand in the gap at this time. Satan thought he had won at the cross, not realizing that Death would not stand as victor. The grave is empty, we now walk following Jesus. They hated him. they will hate us. But even as they hate, we pray for them, so that they may see our good works and either will praise God for us, or will confess when every knee will bend. May many who are foes, still be drawn to Jesus while the day of salvation is still available. Even one soul coming to faith is worth all the effort.
I am probably going to get negative comments about this....but, I have a different view on part of this. I agree with Eric that businesses should not get harassed and sued due to religious beliefs or practices. This entire effort against Phillips is a left wing organized stunt for publicity etc. But, what are businesses in business for? Usually to provide a product/service to make money. Are the gay couples asking him to put depictions of homosexual sex acts or of body parts on the cake? If a man goes into the business to buy a cake for his girlfriend....does Phillips ask if he is having pre-marital sex with his girlfriend? What about "self gratification"....which Biblically can be considered a sin. Does Phillips ensure that someone like Jeffrey Toobin does not get a cake? Sin is sin....correct? Where does his religious beliefs begin and end? Does this not make him a hypocrite? Why not just go ahead and bake the cakes and give the money to a Christian church or charity organization? I guess I just think there are more worthy hills to die on.
Thoughtful comments and questions, leaving me some important points to ponder. Perhaps Phillips may be due some grace from us if we agree that none of us are 100% logical, linear, or fully consistent in our pursuit of living and walking in our faith. But, we much earnestly try to live in accordance with our faith beliefs, seek grace from our God for when we stumble, and extend grace as freely as we want to receive it.
On a surface level, I don’t disagree with you. It is one thing to refuse to bake a cake with a particular design; another to refuse to bake any cake if it is going to be taken to an event one disagrees with.
However, it is the government, not private business, that is required to be viewpoint-neutral. Businesses may not refuse to bake cakes for persons, but they are not required to celebrate events which they believe would be a violation of their religious principals.
There are a lot of sticky situations one could imagine here (can they refuse to sell a dozen ready-made cookies if they will be eaten at a gay wedding celebration?), but religious freedom is a bedrock principal of our Constitution and I think we get into trouble if we try to parse it too closely.
FWIW, I disagree vehemently with Phillips’ beliefs, but I defend his right to have them and act on them.
Just to clarify my comment a bit. I do agree that the government should NOT be forcing Phillips or any business owner to sell the cakes. I am just questioning his parameters. Where is the point at which the sin is acceptable to bake the cake. Does his convictions end after homosexuality and divorce/second marriages?
From what I've read, and I've read a lot about it, he serves gay persons, transgender persons, divorced persons, and he doesn't question people about their personal lives. It was only when he was specifically asked to design and create something for an event that he didn't feel he could participate in the celebration of, that the issue arose.
First, when two men asked him to design a cake for "their" wedding. It was unavoidable to him...he either participated in the celebration of something that the Bible condemns, or he had to refuse. He refused. And I don't think he had the slightest inkling that it would turn into all of this, but once he had refused, he either had to knowingly participate, or stand on his principles.
Then, the trap was cleverly laid by Scardina. Had Scardina simply asked for a pink and blue birthday cake, without specifically stating that it was to "celebrate a gender transition", there would have been no problem. If Scardina had merely said it was for a transgender person's birthday, he'd have baked the cake. The trap was to make him participate in the "celebration of gender transition", which he would not do.
You have to realize, that at that point in time, they were getting multiple phone calls and emails requesting cakes with obscene images and Satanic symbols, many of which requests came from Scardina.
But the law DOES allow him to refuse cakes with words and imagery he would not make for anyone...so they couldn't get any traction suing him for that...the trap had to be set to ensure that the cake itself was innocuous, just the event that it was celebrating was one involving a "protected class". Scardina has been quite open about the fact that it was entrapment...and specifically stated it was to force him to "change his way of thinking".
He'll probably be forced to close, but I doubt he's going to "change his thinking".
Wonder if Phillips could counter-sue for harassment.
I'm certainly no lawyer, but I wonder if Phillips might not still win. He would not refuse to sell a cake to this person, regardless of the fact that the person is transgender. The person knew if he told Phillips he was transgender without telling him the specifics of the occasion, that Phillips would still bake the cake. Thus, this person ordered the cake for the express purpose of interfering with Phillips' free exercise of his religion.
I think if it were a stock cake rather than a custom cake, Phillips might have a harder argument to make. But I rather suspect that SCOTUS would rather not get into the game of parsing the exact circumstances of individual commercial orders.
Thank you for this additional information. It is very helpful. Does he do internet sales? I will order a cake from him and give him some business.
Well therein lies the secret to life. Where do we draw our lines?
Thank you for clarifying the issue in a way that I can understand.
Another great post, Erick.