- Sep 29, 2015
- 19,732
- 16,515
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-American-Solidarity
Upvote
0
LOLLOL 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.
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.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
A lot more to it than the above: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.
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.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.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.
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)Once again for you it is about the cake.
Ask him. Maybe he will even throw in some glitterI 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?
Maybe he does not make pink and blue cakes.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
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.
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.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?