Colorado Defies Supreme Court Ruling, Punishing Christian Baker Jack Phillips Over Transgender Cake

[chevyontheriver]

.

 

[oldrunner]

I think he should of just gave "it" a cupcake. On the house.

 

[drjean]

The baker won his case, remember? He did not break the law "once again" but upheld his beliefs.
They are going to continue this to break him (the bank) so he goes out of business...the old John McCain IRS order of business. Does the baker have a gofundme.com page yet? I hope so!

 

[Hank77]

LOL yeah, like anyone just goes into a bakery and asks for a regular birthday cake these days.

If the customer ordered a pink and blue birthday cake, Phillips would have baked it, took the money and none would be the wiser.

LOL
That is what I meant by a regular birthday cake and thinking of the writing on the cake being Happy Birthday.
If it had been me I would have said I can make you a blue and pink birthday cake and left it at that. I would have ignored their attempt to entrap. Why give them the satisfaction of playing their game.

 

[Yarddog]

Colorado Defies Supreme Court Ruling, Punishing Christian Baker Jack Phillips Over Transgender Cake

08-15-2018
Heather Sells

Colorado baker Jack Phillips is being targeted for his faith yet again – this time for refusing to bake a cake to celebrate a gender transition.

The Denver cake artist first came under fire for refusing to bake a same-sex wedding cake. But then the US Supreme Court ruled this summer on his behalf, chastising the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's treatment of Phillips which it said "showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection."

The Colorado Civil Rights Division had previously ruled in favor of bakers' rights in three other cases where customers ordered cakes that demeaned gay people or gay marriages and the bakers declined to make the cakes. It ruled against Phillips for refusing to bake a gay wedding cake.

Now, Phillips is filing a federal lawsuit after the state civil rights division determined in June that Phillips' Masterpiece Cakeshop discriminated against a customer who wanted a cake to celebrate her coming out as transgender. The woman requested a birthday cake that was pink on the inside and blue on the outside.

Autumn Scardina told the state that she requested the cake to celebrate her gender transition. She said, "When I explained I am a transsexual and that I wanted my birthday cake to celebrate my transition by having a blue exterior and a pink interior they told me they will not make the cake based on their religious beliefs."

The division said that Phillips contended that he won't support a message that "promotes the idea that a person's sex is anything other than an immutable God-given biological reality."

It ordered Phillips and Scardina to schedule a "compulsory mediation" with the agency.

The remainder of the article at link:

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/201...ian-baker-jack-phillips-over-transgender-cake

The court didn't rule against Colorado. They set aside their ruling for the present time. The Baker refusing to bake the cakes still goes against Colorado's anti discrimination law.

 

[Hank77]

Scardina, the lawyer who requested the cake celebrating a gender transition, is not a defendant in Phillips’ lawsuit. The baker is suing the state commission’s members in their official capacities, as well as suing its director personally.

Phillips said:


The Bible tells us God created us male and female, and I believe that. A gender-transition cake is not something I’ve ever made, and it’s not an event I could celebrate. There are plenty of messages I won’t convey on a cake. I’ve turned down requests to make anti-American cakes, cakes disparaging the LGBT community, as well as those glorifying drug and alcohol use, mistreatment of women, divorce, and more.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08...ker-again-despite-supreme-courts-cake-ruling/

 

[redleghunter]

The court didn't rule against Colorado. They set aside their ruling for the present time. The Baker refusing to bake the cakes still goes against Colorado's anti discrimination law.

A lot more to it than the above:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf

 

[parousia70]

I wonder what the baker would say if I went to that cake shop and asked him to make me a cake with a Cross, a wedding ring and lots and lots of little sperms & eggs on it to celebrate the fact I'm having lots and lots of Christian marital sex with my spouse of the opposite gender as we try to procreate?

 

[hedrick]

Technically they may not have violated the Supreme Court decision, since the Court didn't decide on the merits. But it still looks like a bad decision.

In the first case the baker refused to talk to the customer. You can't call it compelled speech, because the customer hadn't specified any particular message (yet). I think had Colorado not been obviously biased, the baker would have lost.

In this case, however, I think the baker has a stronger case. The customer specified a design with a specific symbolic significance. I think you can make a good case that this one actually is compelled speech.

In addition, the problem that led to the Supreme Court decision may still be there. They said that the Colorado commission was biased against Phillips, with some reason. Has that bias vanished? I'm not sure quite how they'd decide, but it doesn't look like it.

Hopefully this one won't have to go to the US Supreme Court. I doubt it's possible for a court to make the State pay for the Philips' legal fees, but this is the kind of case where that would be appropriate.

 

[DamianWarS]

You know good and well that this baker was targeted. They are trying to punish him for his beliefs. They couldn't get him on the homosexual thing so they are taking a run at him in the transgender thing. Who's "they" you ask? I have a sneaking suspicion that this transgender person did not act alone on his/her own idea. I could be wrong of course. Maybe he/she thought this up on her/his own just to "get" the baker, but I doubt it.

apparently the request to make the cake was made by a lawyer named "Autumn Scardina". A quick google search of the name links to this page which in her bio it states "Having recently lived through a period of tremendous personal change, [Scardina's] greatest satisfaction is in seeing others through difficult and emotional challenges and helping them thrive in spite of what can feel like overwhelming circumstance." I'm going to make an judgment call here and say that Scardina is transgendered. So it would appear Scardina called this bakery for a personal request and as a lawyer took offense to the discrimination. In some ways it feels like a setup but maybe it's just someone who cares about her rights as I would suspect that lawyers would have a particular sensitivity when they feel their rights are being violated.

 

[oldrunner]

This is why conservative Supreme court Justices are needed. Once a law gets passed, it will hardly ever get overturned. Anti-discrimination laws are the blanket that has ruined our country, IMO.

 

[SilverBear]

You know good and well that this baker was targeted. They are trying to punish him for his beliefs. They couldn't get him on the homosexual thing so they are taking a run at him in the transgender thing. Who's "they" you ask? I have a sneaking suspicion that this transgender person did not act alone on his/her own idea. I could be wrong of course. Maybe he/she thought this up on her/his own just to "get" the baker, but I doubt it.

if he didn't discriminate then no amount of "targeting" would do anything.

 

[SilverBear]

Once again for you it is about the cake.

It's not about the cake at all which is why I'm making fun of how obscene that cake was....(blue AND pink. Close your eyes children)

it has nothing to do with the cake, and everything to do with our favorite baker again discriminating and refusing to serve customers

 

[redleghunter]

I wonder what the baker would say if I went to that cake shop and asked him to make me a cake with a Cross, a wedding ring and lots and lots of little sperms & eggs on it to celebrate the fact I'm having lots and lots of Christian marital sex with my spouse of the opposite gender as we try to procreate?

Ask him. Maybe he will even throw in some glitter

 

[redleghunter]

It's not about the cake at all which is why I'm making fun of how obscene that cake was....(blue AND pink. Close your eyes children)

it has nothing to do with the cake, and everything to do with our favorite baker again discriminating and refusing to serve customers

Maybe he does not make pink and blue cakes.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

It will be interesting to see how those who want to compel Jack to make this cake will argue. The customer has requested a specific set of imagery with the intent of the imagery being the celebration of transgenderism.

Jack Philips doesn't hold to this new secularist position but the Christian position which recognizes the objectivity of the sexes, that our being male or female is something we cannot change over time or in an instant.

Will they argue like last time that this doesn't violate Jack's conscience when it clearly does? Will they argue that Jack has no right to express himself in his creations, that his work is subject to any all who demand something of him?

Good luck making that argument.

 

[Yarddog]

A lot more to it than the above:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf

SCOTUS didn't rule in favor of the Baker in the case involving the cake. They ruled that the commission acted in a hostile manner towards the Baker and set aside their ruling.

 

[DamianWarS]

the article is quoted "we tried to make it clear that we'd sell this individual anything else in our shop or other custom work, but we couldn't create that one because of my belief." So Philps is not refusing to sell to a transgendered he is refusing to make a cake that sends a message that conflicts with his beliefs.

But the only message I can see is the colours of the cake. If the cake's transgendered message was only the colours without any transgendered inscriptions then perhaps Phillips may lose this battle as the cake itself is not directly making any transgendered statement. Then you need to ask is it reasonable to refuse to make a cake not because the cake's specifics makes a message but because of what the cake is being used for and when is it ok to make this judgment?

 

[FireDragon76]

Perhaps somebody with such a tender conscience should not be in the cake baking business.

 

[hedrick]

So Philps is not refusing to sell to a transgendered he is refusing to make a cake that sends a message that conflicts with his beliefs.

But the only message I can see is the colours of the cake.

The Supreme Court in other contexts has considered symbolic messages to be messages (e.g. cases involving the flag). The customer was clear about what the symbolism was.

I also think there's reason to suggest a setup, though that fact probably has no legal significance.