Attorneys for an Oregon couple who
were punished by a state bureaucrat over a wedding cake are reviewing a federal
appeals court decision.
The Associated Press (AP) reported
December 28th that the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld a decision by the Oregon
Bureau of Labor and Industries that resulted in a $135,000 penalty against
Aaron and Melissa Klein, who owned the bakery Sweetcakes by Melissa, located in
Gresham. The Kleins refused to take an
order for a same-sex wedding cake and the legal battle that ensued marked one
of the country’s first cases that pitted a business owner’s religious views
against non-discrimination laws that include homosexuals and lesbians.
The Kleins argued that a liberal labor
commissioner, Brad Avakian, violated their religious rights and free speech
rights when he imposed the staggering fine for causing emotional distress to
the lesbian couple. Avakian garnered
national attention for issuing a gag order to silence the Kleins and even
demanding that they pay the fine using personal assets and not their business, The Washington Times has reported.
Avakian was also known for advocating
for homosexual rights, and the Kleins argued that he should have stepped away
from their case after he issued a 122-page order that claimed the lesbians
suffered 80 symptoms -- resuming smoking habits, weight gain, doubt, and worry
-- from the incident that they described as “mental rape.” Yet the Kleins failed to prove their case
against Avakian, the AP story
reported; and Avakian proclaimed the court ruling shows Oregon is “open to all.”
The decision against the Kleins comes
just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of
Colorado baker Jack Phillips. That
decision is expected in June 2018. Writing
about that pending decision at National Review,
Kevin Williamson warned about the legal consequences if Christians are forced
by “government bayonets” to perform a duty they are morally opposed to. He wrote: Telling a black man that he may not
work in your bank because he is black is in reality a very different thing from
telling a gay couple that you’d be happy to sell them cupcakes or cookies or
pecan pies but you do not bake cakes for same-sex weddings — however much the
principle of the thing may seem superficially similar. If the public sphere is infinite, then the
private sphere does not exist, and neither does private life.
“Obviously this is a blow for the
Constitution and the rule of law in this country, and I think it’s a sad day in
this country when people can be punished for their religious beliefs,” says
Mike Berry, the attorney at First Liberty (FL) who represents the Kleins.
When asked about the Phillips’ case,
Berry says it’s too early to know how that outcome will affect the Kleins. “It would really depend,” he says, “on how
broad or narrow of a ruling the Supreme Court issues in that case.”
Firsthand observers of the Phillips’ oral
arguments left the courtroom predicting that Justice Anthony Kennedy, known as
a swing vote, could side with Jack Phillips.
FL, in fact, is seeking what Justice Kennedy pointed out during the oral
arguments. “Tolerance is really a
two-way street in this country,” says Berry, “and if we truly are going to be a
nation that values diversity of all points of view and all beliefs, then
tolerance really does have to run both ways.”
Rev.
Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.
Chaplain
(Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army
Pastor, Ft. Snelling
Memorial Chapel
It wasn't that long ago that you could find businesses with signs stating that they reserved the right to refuse service. Of course that all went away with the civil rights movement and of course refusing service based on race or gender was wrong. We used to see signs stating that "no shirt, no shoes, no service". Did that mean we were discriminating against barefooted people? The signs were actually there because of health department regulations. As I have indicated in previous comments, discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing. It depends on why one is discriminating. Would I have the right to demand a ham sandwich in a diner owned by a Muslim? If he refused would he be discriminating against Christians? What would the court say about that? As Rev. Beale mentioned in his 7 Jan sermon, the court is actively redefining the Christian religion in an attempt to remove it from the pubic square.
ReplyDelete