Archive for the ‘Jack Phillips’ Tag

Another Colorado Baker Faces Discrimination Charges   5 comments

I predicted this, by the way.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/01/22/this-colorado-baker-refused-to-put-an-anti-gay-message-on-cakes-now-she-is-facing-a-civil-rights-complaint/

I don’t know Bill Jack, the man who ordered the cake, but I suspect this was a set up to do exactly what he is doing, pushing this into the courts to force Colorado courts to a major decision.

The Masterpiece Cake case last year involved a Christian who refused to bake a “wedding” cake for a same-sex couple because he believes God does not want him to participate in homosexual activities even to this degree. Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission with the backing of Colorado courts ruled that Jack Phillips had no right to exercise his freedom of religion and opt out of same- sex weddings. He has since stopped baking wedding cakes altogether.

On the surface, Bill Jack did a deplorable thing. He asked the baker to bake a wedding cake that said “God Hates Gays”. You’ll have to look back in my blog for my full position on this, but God does not hate gays, only the sexual behavior gays participate in, and Christians are not called to hate, but to live in love with God, which will sometimes put us at odds with the world. While I fully support Jack Phillips’ right to practice freedom of religion and refuse to bake a “wedding” cake for a same-sex couple, I call Bill Jack a sinner for the hateful nature of what he requested. And I fully support Marjorie Silva’s right to refuse to participate in his act of hate.

But I suspect Mr. Jack is pushing an issue that needs to be pushed. I don’t think this is about hatred of homosexuals at all. I think this is about civil rights — the right of Christians not to participate in objectionable activities through our businesses.

Jack Phillips, the Masterpiece Cake baker, chose not to bake a cake because he believes God does not approve of homosexual lifestyles, including same-sex “marriage”. He further believes that he as a Christian should not participate in homosexual lifestyles, even by giving them the tacit approval of baking a cake for a same-sex “wedding. So he refused to bake a “wedding” cake. In doing so, he stood firmly on the 1st Amendment and the Bible. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission chose to ignore the long-established definition of “freedom” and forced him and his employees to submit to “reeducation” classes and promise to be the go-to bakery for gay wedding cakes.

Now Marjorie Silva is making a stand on her right not to inscribe a hateful message on a cake. I fully support that decision and for the same reason. If Mr. Jack wanted his anti-gay cake, he could have found another baker willing to do it for him or taken Silva up on her offer to provide the tools for him to do it himself. Instead, he filed a civil rights complaint. The article I am posting insists the cases are different. I would argue that they are not. It really comes down to this:

If Christians can be forced to participate in the activities of the world that we consider to be sin — if we have no freedom of conscience to refuse — than we have no freedom of religion and we might as well be living under a totalitarian state.

In fact, I would argue that we are living in a totalitarian state and just haven’t acknowledged it yet. If you belong to a marginalized minority — which is what Christians have become in this nation — you do not have the same standing before the courts as someone who is a member of a protected class of citizens.

This case is going to prove that.

I predict the Human Rights Commission and the Colorado courts will rule in favor of Marjorie Silva, the owner of Azucar Bakery. They will pontificate that Silva was exercising the correct sort of conscience and therefore had every freedom to deny Bill Jack service. In doing so, they will make it clear that Christians are no longer considered equal citizens who have a right of conscience unless they align their beliefs with the current worldview.

See also —

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-wont-review-new-mexico-gay-commitment-ceremony-photo-case/2014/04/07/f9246cb2-bc3a-11e3-9a05-c739f29ccb08_story.html

 

Mandated Sexual Immorality   Leave a comment

My conversation with Thom Stark is touching on issues that I have touched on before. Rather than say the same thing in different ways, I’m reprinting the articles because I don’t think I can say them better in a different way.

 

————

Last year, Masterpiece Cakes in Denver was told by the Colorado courts to bake cakes for gay weddings or stop baking cakes altogether. In August, the New York State Division of Human Rights fined Cynthia and Robert Gifford $13,000 for acting on their belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman and thus declining to rent out their family farm for a same-sex wedding celebration, ruling that Christianity’s historical belief about marriage is now “discrimination”. Like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Giffords are also required to institute anti-discrimination re-education classes and procedures for their staff.

http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/19/government-farmers-host-sex-wedding-pay-13000-fine/

It is now considered just to force citizens with moral objections to participate in what they consider to be sin if they want to stay in business.

We’ve lost the cultural war, folks. There’s no use arguing the point. My 21-year-old daughter (a Christian) thinks Jesus is fine with homosexuals’ marrying. She even believes that the Bible was tampered with to include anti-homosexual passages. I’m not going to argue with her about it. I’ve given her access to several books that show how reliable the Bible as we have it is and I’ll let God do the rest. Sometimes you have to know when to back off and let the Holy Spirit work.

But these two incidents bring us to a set of questions. Should the government of a “free society” be able to force family businesses to betray their consciences and participate in ceremonies that violate their beliefs? That’s an argument for another day. The more important discussion is – how did we get here?

Christians – how did we get here?

I’ve been posting on Moralistic Therapeutic Deism and I suspect the church’s failure to reach our culture on a whole host of such issues is tied to that.

Twenty yeas ago, same-sex marriage was the least of all political concerns. Then Bill Clinton tried to fulfill a campaign promise with Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which led to the Defense of Marriage Act. All of a sudden, we entered what historians will one day recall as a cultural revolution greater than anything that happened in the 1960s. By 1993, the cover story of The Nation identified gay rights as the summit and cornerstone of the culture war to forever change America. We’re now in the endgame and conservatives have lost. It is commonly believed that the only reason to oppose same-sex marriage is rank bigotry or for religious reasons and, the argument that follows is, neither of these has any place in determining laws or public standards.

In some ways, it’s a generational thing. Polls show that young people think homosexuality is normal and that opposition to it has the moral status of segregation in the late 1960s. In the 2010 book American Grace, political scientists Robert D. Putman and David E. Campbell noted that there was a marked change in attitudes around 1990. Young adults at the time were accepting homosexuality as a moral in increasing numbers while at the same time, they were falling away from organized religion. Religious disengagement and liberal sexual attitudes appear to go hand-in-hand.

The Pew Research Center’s Greg Smith conducted a 2012 study that showed this interaction as well. He asserted that this current generation is more religious unaffiliated than any on record and that there is no reason to think they will return to church in significant numbers as they age, as had been noted in past generations.

Putnam and Campbell were careful to say in American Grace that correlation is not causation, but they pointed out that the public role many Christian leaders took in opposing gay marriage alienated young Americans from organized religion and suggested that Christian churches would need to liberalize on sexual teaching if we hoped to regain and retain the loyalty of younger generations.

The problem with that suggestion is that Mainline Protestant denominations, which have been far more accepting of homosexuality and sexual liberation in general, are losing membership much more quickly than more tradition conservative denominations that oppose gay marriage and discourage sexual liberation.

Why? Maybe when people decided that historical normative Christianity was wrong about sex, they also decided that everything else was wrong about Christianity. Finding a church that agreed with their liberalism did not solve their basic problem of a lack of faith.

Folks, we’re losing the culture and it has almost nothing to do with gay marriage. That is a symptom, not a cause.

 

The Importance of A Cake   Leave a comment

What difference does it make? How would Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop have been harmed if he had simply ignored the clear fact that his customers were a gay couple and baked the cake? Alternatively, why couldn’t he have lied, said he was too busy and let Mr. Mullins and Mr. Craig continue in their delusion that everyone is now on board with homosexuality as a societal good?

Both scenarios would have required Mr. Phillips to violate God’s law – either by lying or by associating with sinful behavior – affecting his relationship with his Savior. To a Christian that relationship takes precedence over all others. We must obey God rather than men.

A historical example of this was First Night, when Romans and later rulers imposed their will on the sanctity of marriage by reserving the right to have sex with the bride on the wedding night. Christians refused because their view of marriage was different from that of the Roman authorities. Research St. Valentine for a fuller story, but the Romans really didn’t understand why Christians refused to comply. What was the big deal? How were the couples harmed? Get with society’s program, Christians! Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

No government official demand First Night today because Christians refused to comply and instead resisted assimilation.

Now, today, it is a cake. What’s the big deal? It’s just a cake! Society says sexual immorality is okay now. Just go along to get along and keep your beliefs to yourselves, Christians. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated!

Today, it’s acake. Next year it may be the government telling my pastor that he must conduct homosexual wedding ceremonies. In a decade, it may well be that my church may be forced to hire an atheist as pastor because we are not allowed to discriminate and choose whom we will or will not associate with. We risk assimilation if we do not resist.

The time to set aside Romans 13 and take a principled stand on behalf of our faith has come, Christians! We must peacefully say “No, we will not comply when society says its agenda takes precedence over our faith. May be that stand will have nothing to do with baking a cake for a homosexual wedding, but Christians must decide if and when our beliefs must be more important to us than getting along with society.

Posted May 24, 2014 by aurorawatcherak in Christianity

Tagged with , , ,

The Libertarian Ideal

Voice, Exit and Post-Libertarianism

CRAIN'S COMMENTS

Social trends, economics, health and other depressing topics!

My Corner

Showcasing My Writing and Me

The Return of the Modern Philosopher

Deep Thoughts from the Shallow End of the Pool

WordDreams...

Jacqui Murray's

Steven Smith

The website of an aspiring author

thebibliophagist

a voracious reader. | a book blogger.

cupidcupid999

adventure, art, nature, travel, photography, wildlife - animals, and funny stuff

Republic-MainStreet

The Peaceful Revolution Liberate Main Street

%d bloggers like this: