Colorado Baker’s Gay Cake Case Is About Compelled Government Speech

5
Share

It’s not the business of media or government to decide what religious people, atheists, LGBTs can or cannot believe or what is immoral in a religious sense, but what should always be a concern is freedom, especially freedom of speech. The case of a Colorado baker is a very important case and is only the beginning if the left wins as is made clear in the first video clip.

The left demands compelled government speech for leftists, but not for the religious right. The speaker in the first video makes it clear that compelled speech in the case of religious organizations is next on their agenda.

The case before us is of a cake maker who refused to create a cake for a gay marriage. He says he considers himself an artist and each of his cakes is a creation.

Do we want the government to be able to force private business owners to create a cake when it’s against their core beliefs?

Thanks to the last administration, the government can force Americans to buy anything with the government deciding who gets that purchase. That was decided by Obamacare.

Axios, the left-wing news site founded by former POLITICO chief journalist Mike Allen, is purported to be fair and unbiased. While they have good information, it is biased very left. Their opposition to cake makers who won’t create gay marriage cakes was presented in their Friday email while the cake maker’s views were merely cause for dripping sarcasm.

The left is framing this as the next gay marriage fight. The government forcing a cake maker to create a gay marriage cake might be over the line, but what this gay man says towards the end in the Axios-sourced video is most concerning — the next fight is religion.

The leftist LGBTQAs want to make it illegal to believe gay marriage is wrong and they will punish religious people who believe otherwise in jobs, in tax benefits to their churches and through civil rights lawsuits. There is nothing in the Constitution about freedom to force others to believe in gay marriage.

The gay couple set up this baker. They could easily have gone to any bakery.

Axios, the “fair and balanced” website did not fairly present the baker’s viewpoint.

Baker Jack Phillips says he is not discriminating, he is refusing to engage in a religious event he is not allowed to religiously support. The Alliance for Defending Freedom is defending him. The lawyer explains tolerance in this case is a one way street.

Next is a video that presents both sides. CATO says the baker has the right to free speech. Compelled speech by government has never been okay.

Share

5 COMMENTS

  1. What has been left out in this discussion is certain details. Apparently this isn’t just about “making a cake”. The contention was the “participation” in the event. The party in the lawsuit wanted the baker to work with them in the “design” of the final product. It May have even went further by having the baker participate in the event also. If all this is true then it went FAR beyond merely baking a cake.

    If this were to be upheld why not have a white supremacist decorate with ‘heil hitler”, or even a racist or some other slur. THAT too would have to be allowed. There already has been such a case and was declined.

  2. Ignorance of the case is no excuse for lying. In fact, there is no compelled speech. The ruling in the case, the original ruling, noted that no baker is required to write a message of any kind. The courts have consistently said that. The issue was not that he was being required to write a message—as he wasn’t, but the would sell the cake to someone purely because they are gay. by the way, the same law protects Christians and more Christians file law suits than gays in such matters, claiming they are victims of discrimination.

    So, not compelled speech and the original ruling made that clear, perhaps you should read the court decision before commenting on things you don’t understand.

    Now, compelled speech would be things like forcing civilians to salute military officers or the flag, or requiring them to stand during the national anthem…. but conservatives actually believe in forced speech when it suits them. Libertarians don’t.

  3. Next, as to being forced to participate in a religious event that violates his faith. His church says divorce is invalid, but he sells wedding cakes to people who are about to marry again committing what his faith says is adultery. He doesn’t worry about his participation then.

    He will sell cakes to people who are celebrating a child’s baptism even if his church doesn’t baptize children but adults. He will “participate” in Catholic confirmations by selling a confirmation cake, even though he’s not Catholic. He’s not Jewish but will “participate” in a bar mitzvah by selling a cake for that. The ONLY time he suddenly finds he’s “participating” in other religious events is when gays are involved. He’s happy to violate that principle when it’s Catholics, Jews, the divorced, etc.

  4. He has previously turned down requests to create Halloween-themed cakes, lewd bachelor-party cakes, and a cake celebrating a divorce. He was never reprimanded over those decisions, but the same-sex-wedding cake plunged him into hot water.

    Part of the problem is that Colorado misunderstood the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Colorado claims that the Court held “opposition to same-sex marriage” to be “tantamount to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

    Ignorance of the case is no excuse

Comments are closed.