Tuesday, June 3, 2014

IN the NEWS - Jail Time for Christians? Here we go....

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God:
Romans 8:7
"An on-going battle has been brewing in Colorado between a gay couple and a Christian baker since 2012. The baker, Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakes had a complaint filed against him by two gays after he refused to provide a cake for their same-sex "wedding."
A ruling handed down Friday by the Colorado state agency board which demands that Phillips violate his faith and create a cake for the gay couple or face jail time and fines. Phillips declined to bake the cake for the homosexuals citing his Christian beliefs.
Phillips believes what the bible says about marriage being between one man and one woman. "The Colorado Civil Rights Division is telling the Lakewood, Colorado, baker must violate his faith and create “wedding” cakes for same-sex duos," according to the WND report.
The ironic thing is that same-sex marriages aren't recognized by the state Constitution of Colorado, and the marriage wasn't even going to be held in Colorado but rather in Massachusetts. The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) which represented Phillips explained the legal filing handed down by the judge by saying:
The government … seek[s] to impose a new belief system upon Jack [Phillips], one that is fundamentally at odds with his conscience and his liberty.
Phillips told the gays what they wanted violated his Christian beliefs. He declined to produce a message on the wedding cake which conflicted with his faith. However, he did offer to provide other products for the gays but that wasn't good enough for them, so they filed a complaint against him.
Furthermore, according to the report, "Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer, had earlier ordered Phillips, on pain of fines or even jail time, to violate his faith and provide the wedding cake to homosexuals Charlie Craig and David Mullins."
As expected the ADF filed an appeal of the “erroneous” ruling, with a petition for review to the commission. However, the commission on Friday decided to uphold the judge's opinion and rejected the ADF's contentions that Judge Spencer, "under the state’s court rules of procedure, should have dismissed the complaint."
According to the notice that ADF filed in the petition said Phillips "did not discriminate ‘because of’ sexual orientation” but acted “in accordance with the provisions of the Colorado Constitution, state law and the public policy of the state.”

The ADF further stated that "Phillips’ “conduct and expressions in declining to design and create a wedding
cake are protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and by Article II, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution."
The lawyers who argued the case said that Phillips and his company has the right to "actual and symbolic speech." This should mean that Phillips "cannot be forced" to endorse or convey a message that he is for something that he disagrees with, in this case same-sex marriage.
The ADF believes that Spencer's ruling is wrong and they also contended “the ALCU’s recommendation that respondents ‘[c]ease and desist from discriminating against complainants and other same-sex couples by refusing to sell them wedding cakes or any other product respondents would provide to heterosexual couples’ is overbroad and exceeds the scope of relief authorized [under state law].”

"America was founded on the fundamental freedom of all citizens to live and work without fear of government punishment,” said Nicole Martin, lead counsel in the case.
However, the arrogance of the seven commissioners was on display as they refused to listen to the ADF's arguments on Friday. Instead they insisted that Phillips must submit "quarterly reports detailing what he’s doing to prevent such actions, such as store employee training, and a tally of whether any customers were turned away." examiner.com


The judge & Colorado Civil Rights Division seem to have forgot this clause in the U.S. Constitution- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Forcing him to be involved in an event that violates his religious conscious should be a clear violation of his CONSTITUTIONAL rights. But--you can't expect a bunch of secular liberals to know or follow the CONSTITUTION. This case would be exhibit A of that.
I don't recognize America anymore....