Colorado Cake and the Justice Department

[Gregory Matthews]

The Justice Department has intervened in the Colorado bakery case that will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

See;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/in-major-supreme-court-case-justice-dept-sides-with-baker-who-refused-to-make-wedding-cake-for-gay-couple/2017/09/07/fb84f116-93f0-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html?utm_term=.83a76f448451

 

[phkrause]

I thought the comments after the article were pretty interesting. Like this one:

Then why can't you force a muslim checker at walmart to handle pork products? This is indentured servitude forcing someone to provide services against his will. Using the government as a club to force you to render services to another is slavery. No one has a right to your time or services. This unjust coercion should have not even been an issue at any time. Even back when it happened in Oregon and they lost their bakery.

I also had a thought or question? What if the person refusing to make the cake or what ever was a atheist? Would there be such a backlash?? Just a thought!!

[CoAspen]

Quote

This is indentured servitude forcing someone to provide services against his will. 

Housing laws then could also be consided. Why christianity supports such ideas is not understandable to me. Is life all about us or others? Christ taught it was about others. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Minutes ago the Supreme Court has ruled in this case.  I has ruled that the baker had the right   to refuse to design a custom cake to celebrate the marriage of a homosexual couple.  The ruling was 6 to 2.

It should be understood that this ruling was  made on the basis of free speech and the right of the baker to refuse to design the cake.  It was not decided on the commerce clause.  IOW, this ruling does not state that the bakery could refuse to sell a standard cake to a homosexual couple.

In brief, this ruling essentially states that a novelist can not be forced to write a novel that presented a specific view.

In addition, the Court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had been illegally hostile to the rights of the baker and that under the law that bakery had been entitled to hearing that were without bias.

This is an important decision.  However, as the decision essentially says,  this case does not decide every issue.  There must be more decisions in order to establish the boundaries.  So, we can expect more litigation.

IOW, this is a very narrow ruling.

 

 

 

 

[phkrause]

On 6/4/2018 at 10:29 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

The ruling was 6 to 2

Wasn't it 7-2??

[bonnie]

Get to know the man behind the Supreme Court victory

“We want God to be part of our lives every day.” For Jack, that means he wants to follow God every day, whether he’s at home or at work. That is why he declines requests to create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events in conflict with his religious beliefs — like cakes celebrating Halloween, bachelor parties, or divorce. Doing this is worth it for Jack because he seeks to honor Jesus above all else. Usually, people understand, but not when he declined to design a wedding cake celebrating a same-sex marriage. For that, he was sued.

ADFLEGAL.ORG

 

Get to know the man behind the Supreme Court victory

Learn More

[Gregory Matthews]

I wrote minutes after the decision was released.  The first reports stated that it was 6 to 2.  Later news reports have stated it was 7 to 2.