Court ruling could have impact on 1st, 14th amendments
There has not been a whole lot printed or said about the SCOTUS decision announced on June 26. The court agreed to hear an appeal of a Colorado courts’ rulings in Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
The profound nature of the outcome of this decision cannot be exaggerated and certainly should not be diminished. This case has always been about much more than the making and selling of a cake. Many in our judiciary, both conservatives and liberals, understand this ruling will dictate the legislative and judicial interpretation of the 1st and 14th Amendments for the foreseeable future.
The potential ramifications of this ruling may surpass those of the monumental Obergefell v. Hughes. That 5-4 decision in 2015 determined gay marriage is a constitutional right. Not only did that change the legal definition of marriage in America, it may have initiated the end of representative democracy. In essence, the decision implied there is no more place for healthy debate, reasoned arguments, or appeal to natural and moral law, or even the wisdom gleaned through human experience for defining what marriage is. The decision ignored our country’s entire history and judicial tradition and unequivocally repudiated it.
Now deceased Justice Antonin Scalia was both candid and sarcastic in his written dissent. He called the arrogance of the majority justices “breathtaking” when they asserted that states violated the constitution from its inception.
The court’s majority opinion in that case set forever a clear tone for the disparaging and condemnation of those with sincerely held religious beliefs who disagree with same-sex marriage. The freedom to hold and promote an opinion on homosexuality, same sex marriage, gender alteration, and so forth is in essence limited to those who support it. To speak in opposition is to guarantee that one will be branded or vilified as a hater, bigot, racist or homophobe. Clearly any opposition to the new orthodoxy must now be censured and ultimately silenced in the view of an ever growing and angry mob.
Now we await the outcome of Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In 2012, a Colorado baker named Jack Phillips politely refused to make a custom wedding cake for two men who had been recently married in Massachusetts. The Bay State was one of only a very few states where same-sex marriage was legal then. The couple had planned a delayed wedding reception in Colorado, where they lived. Phillips, a devout Christian, explained to them that making the cake would violate his conscience and biblical beliefs. Those beliefs included the conviction that marriage is a holy covenant between a man and woman.
These were not “newly discovered” standards for Phillips. For years, it was the same response given should anyone request a cake for celebrating Halloween, or desire a message that in Phillip’s view was anti-American, anti-family or racist. He also declined to create cakes with messages which were hateful, vulgar or profane. Even the opposition conceded that Phillips strived to honor God in all aspects of his life, including his bakery trade.
This decision to obey the Bible and follow his convictions had cost his bakery thousands of dollars in lost revenue through the years. But neither did Phillips refuse nor object to serving any customer regardless of their sexual orientation. It is acknowledged by all that he had readily created other items for gay and lesbian patrons. Phillips simply believed that only marriage between a man and a woman was biblical and worthy of celebration. Therefore, he declined to make a custom cake for a non-biblical marriage ceremony because of the message it conveys, and his participation in that message.
When the patrons were rebuffed, they did not simply seek the services of another baker. They could have, and there were many who would have accommodated the couple. In fact, one nearby bakery offered a free wedding cake with a rainbow design and common marriage sentiments. At least four other local bakeries also offered to bake the cake. Both sides know: the issue to be settled this fall is not about a cake, equality or the civil rights of homosexuals. The main issue seems more to center on a determination to silence unwanted and politically incorrect speech in reference to the open opposition of a secular world view pertaining to the nature of marriage. The couple immediately filed charges of discrimination based on sexual orientation with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
Phillips was found guilty of the violation and was ordered to create wedding cakes celebrating same-sex marriage, retrain his staff to do likewise, and report every declined order for any reason for the next two years. Phillips appealed the ruling and has since lost at every level.
Are not there legitimate reasons for a refusal of service? Should a Muslim baker be forced to make a cake with a message that denigrates the Koran? Should a homosexual baker be forced to create a cake message which celebrates and honors the activities and ministries of the Westboro Baptist Church? Should a Jewish baker be forced to make a product with a message which disparages Israel? I am sure that exceptions to Colorado rules would be readily granted for those. Why not for a Christian who is trying to follow his biblical beliefs? This insane political correctness must stop.
Phillips had every right and even an obligation to not offend his conscience or ignore what he truly believes. His refusal harmed no one. All Americans should be praying the commission’s decision will be overturned.
William “Ed” Nicholson is current pastor of the Grace Baptist Chapel at Little Summit in Dunbar Twp. He holds graduate degrees in both Bible and Education. He may be reached at willien@hughes.net or www.thegracebaptistchapel.com.