The media portrayal of the new Supreme Court case spins as a need to “balance” rights.
If the Supreme Court understands its role in society as “balancing” different rights, it has already determined that it is going to rule in favor of injustice. Just because the Supreme Court officially believes in the oxymoronic fiction of “same-sex marriage” does not cancel out the rights of Christians, Muslims, or other religious individuals, who don’t affirm that travesty. Using violence to force people to serve you against their will is slavery.
The media will pretend otherwise. The Associated Press reports, “Supreme Court takes on new clash of gay rights, religion.”
The case asks the high court to balance the religious rights of the baker against the couple’s right to equal treatment under the law. Similar disputes have popped up across the United States.
Phillips told the Supreme Court he has free speech and religious rights under the First Amendment that should protect him. He said he should not be compelled to bake a cake specifically to honor a same-sex marriage.
Colorado’s anti-discrimination law protects people on the basis of their sexual orientation.
Jack Philips’ request is clear. He does not want to be coerced into affirming a doctrine that he thinks is false. But the rest is obfuscation. A law that “protects people on the basis of their sexual orientation” would be a law protecting them from violence. What they really mean is a law that forces Christian businessmen to affirm same-sex marriage.
But clearly stating the truth does not serve the interests of progressives.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com