In a ruling that was 7-2, the Supreme Court declared Monday that Jack Phillips had been treated with open hostility by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Now, if you’ve been living in a mud hut over the past few years and don’t have a clue what I’m talking about, here’s a sixty-second recap:
Jack Phillips is the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop. A gay couple came into his business and told him to make them a cake decorated with homosexual stuff on it. As a Christian, Jack politely told them that he could not violate his conscious and religious beliefs by decorating a cake that way. He said he could make a cake without gay decorations, but he could not promote gay marriage. The gay bullies got angry, filed a complaint with Colorado, and the State became openly hostile to Jack. They demanded he make the cake and ignore his devotion to Jesus Christ and biblical morality, based on a Colorado law that businesses from refusing to serve people based on sexual preference. Jack sued to maintain his Constitutional rights to freedom of expression and religion. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that he had indeed been treated with derision and hostility by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and said he did not have to make the cake.
It is no more appropriate for the United States Supreme Court to tell Mr. Phillips that a wedding cake is just like any other…than it would be for the Court to suggest that for all persons sacramental bread is just bread or a kippah is just a cap. – Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court Justice
Ok, now that you’re all caught up, let’s talk about what it means, what it doesn’t mean, and why Christians and conservatives should be more vigilant than ever in paying attention to this stuff:
1. This ruling means that Jack was treated wrongly and won his individual case before the Supreme Court. He had correctly identified the State of Colorado as hostile to his Christian faith, and his claim of oppression and persecution was recognized by the nation’s highest court.
2. This ruling does not mean that all bakers across America can refuse to make cakes for gay people (or any other protected class) because of religious reasons. The ruling applied only to Jack and his case about State persecution.
3. This ruling does not exempt Jack from a future complaint by homosexuals who might try and persecute him again. Literally, the exact same gay couple could walk into his cake shop, demand the same cake, and when he refused for the same reason, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission could rule against him again. Only this time they could win, if they act all nice and polite about denying him his rights.
4. This stuff isn’t going away anytime soon. Don’t be deceived; God-hating leftists everywhere are salivating at the idea of bringing more of these cases to courtrooms across the nation. The Supreme Court didn’t make a sweeping decision that applies to everyone in America, and that means liberals are chomping at the bits to continue oppressing people who won’t openly applaud and support homosexuality. Even as I write this there is a case working its way through the court system on much of the same issue, this time involving a florist.
In a better world, when a homosexual walks into a shop and demands a service, only to find out that the business owner cannot provide that service, they simply say thanks, leave, and shop with one of the million other business owners out there that provide the service. Both sides win. Both people get what they want. But that’s not the world we live in.
In our world, Christians have become the persecuted and the LGBT agenda-drivers have become the bullies. They will not stop until every Christian in every city across the United States has either publicly bowed down to the glory of homosexuality, or else closed up their doors and went home. This isn’t an issue of selling a wrench, a ladder, a baseball glove, or a can of soda to someone because you disagree with them. This is an issue of homosexuals attempting to force Christians to produce goods and services which directly violate Scriptures and the core tenants of Christian faith.
There is perhaps no better way to sum up the matter than the words of a Supreme Court justice himself. The newest member of the court, Neil Gorsuch, put the real issue front and center. He said, “It is no more appropriate for the United States Supreme Court to tell Mr. Phillips that a wedding cake is just like any other — without regard to the religious significance his faith may attach to it — than it would be for the Court to suggest that for all persons sacramental bread is just bread or a kippah is just a cap.”
Well said, Mr. Gorsuch. Well said. We’ll need that type of religious-liberty defending morality in our corner the next time a case like this will have to be decided. And make no mistake, these cases are on their way.
And so the fight continues…