Live and let live does not seem to apply equally. Recently a Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled that Christian business owner, Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cake Shop, must bake cakes for homosexual “marriages” in spite of his conscientious objections based on his Christian convictions.
This particular persecution started when two homosexuals, Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig, who were “married” in Massachusetts, decided to travel to Colorado shortly after the ruling allowing same-sex “marriage” and ask for a wedding cake at the Masterpiece Cake Shop; even though they were already “married” and presumably already had their cake. Phillips refused based on his Christian beliefs and has cited the Bible as condemning homosexuality. To this end, he prefers to follow his conscience and scriptures and suffer the consequences rather than violate his conscience.
Instead of hurting his business, Masterpiece Cake Shop is thriving, much like Chic-Fil-A and others who took a principled stand on this issue. It appears that public opinion is sending a message diametrically opposed to what the mainstream media reports. In fact, Phillips says he is so busy that he has stopped making wedding cakes altogether.
Requesting services that clearly endorse same sex “marriage” from the business sector is one way of routing out and making an example of the opposition. This is being done in many places that same-sex “marriage” has been imposed, thus intimidating anyone with opposing views.
It is not surprising that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) jumped into the fray to challenge Phillips’ First Amendment rights, claiming that anti-discrimination laws trump freedom of religion, conscience and expression. Homosexuals claim that to discriminate against homosexuality is the same as race discrimination. However, no one chooses his skin color, versus homosexuality, which is a choice—one subject to constant change.
Colorado commission chairman Katina Banks stated “You can have your beliefs, but you can’t hurt other people at the same time.”1 How does this apply to Phillips whose livelihood is threatened since he does not share the beliefs of those who want to change the definition of marriage.
A verbal ruling was issued by the Commission ordering Phillips to report for “anti-discrimination training” every three months for a period of two years, and submit reports demonstrating that he did not turn away requests for homosexual “wedding” cakes and re-write policy for his staff to do the same. Phillips has no intentions of giving up any part of his faith or writing any new policy because he feels that what his family has been doing for the last forty years is just fine.
It all sounds so much like a Communist re-education camps found in China or North Korea. Under the guise of anti-discrimination, Phillips is being discriminated against because he has sound Christian principles and simply will not buckle to the homosexual agenda.
The general public does not fall for the sophisms of the homosexual movement and they are patronizing his bakeshop in droves. On his part, Phillips has vowed to continue resisting the judicial dictatorship that persecutes the good and attacks the conscience of a humble baker.