SCOTUS is Baking the Cake that Could End All Cakes

Question:

Should a gay baker be legally required to design a cake with the message, “God hates fags”?

Should an African American t-shirt maker be required by law to design a t-shirt saying, “Long live the KKK?”

Should a Muslim caterer be required by law to provide pork for a secular event?

Should a Jewish photographer be required to shoot a wedding on the Sabbath?

The answer to all these questions is: Of course not.

Why, then, should a Christian baker be required by law to design a cake celebrating the “wedding” of a same-sex couple?

That is the big question the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) will be answering in the weeks ahead when it hears the Masterpiece Cakes case involving Christian baker Jack Phillips.  [read my previous blog posting on September 20, 2017]

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which is defending Phillips, has pointed out that:

1) “Jack does not discriminate,” and he was perfectly happy to sell the gay couple cookies and brownies and anything else pre-made off of his shelves; but subsequently they took him to court.

2) “Jack has turned down other cakes in the past,” including Halloween cakes and lewd cakes.

3) “Jack has faced anti-religious bigotry as well as threats and intimidation simply because he declined to promote an event,” so he is the one being singled out for unfair treatment.

4) “Jack owns a private family business, and he doesn’t give up his rights when he sells his art,” and by calling his business “Masterpiece Cakes,” he is making clear that for him, they are works of art.

5) Accordingly, “Jack’s shop has been called an ‘art gallery of cakes.’”

6) “Wedding cakes made up about 40 percent of Jack’s business,” and these are all custom designed.  But due to Colorado’s laws and legal rulings to date, he has had to drop this part of his business entirely.

Now, common sense would say that this case should be a no-brainer, a slam-dunk win for Jack Phillips and his ADF attorneys.  The problem, however, is that “gay rights” have been exalted to such a degree that these “rights” outdo all other rights and freedoms … including our freedoms of conscience, speech, and religion.

In the case at hand, because Phillips is a committed Christian, he doesn’t make cakes mixed with alcohol (nor can he be required to), he doesn’t make cakes for lewd bachelor parties (nor can he be required to), and he doesn’t make cakes for horror-themed events (nor can he be required to).  But when he cannot, in good conscience, use his artistic skills to make a cake for a same-sex “wedding,” he can be charged with violating the state’s anti-discrimination laws to the point that the state can now discriminate against him as a Christian.  In other words, you can freely exercise your Christian beliefs unless those beliefs offend gays.  In that case, you’re breaking the law.

If a Hindu came in and wanted a, “Krishna is Lord” cake, Phillips could politely decline, without legal penalty or pressure.  The same would apply to a Muslim baker declining to bake a cake for a Christian with the words, “Jesus is Lord.”  But wouldn’t that offend the Hindu and the Christian wanting to buy the cakes?  Perhaps so, but the bakers are rightly protected by the law and cannot be penalized for refusing the business.

Why, then, are gays and lesbians treated differently?  Why are they put in a special category?  The sympathetic answer would be that society has over-compensated for perceived past injustices.  And so, the pendulum has swung from one side (mistreatment of gays and lesbians) to the other side (overprotection of gays and lesbians).

Listen: The real agenda is that some gay activists have always had as their ultimate goal the silencing of those who resist their cause. 

Many on the Left will argue that Phillips was guilty of discriminating against gay customers, but that is a complete misrepresentation of the facts; and if the SCOTUS finds him guilty, the implications for America will be massive.  It will mean that the highest court in the land has ruled that, in virtually all conceivable cases, gay rights go one better than religious rights.  And it will mean that Christians in particular can be forced to violate their consciences and their deeply held, historic beliefs under penalty of law, with the real potential of losing their very livelihoods.  And should they still refuse to comply, it could mean a jail sentence too.

If the first generation of Christians were martyred for not denying the faith, what’s the imprisonment of today’s Christians … in comparison? 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel