If you are going to bake a cake, is that an involvement of free speech rights? Is it an involvement of religious rights? Can you be forced to bake a cake that goes against your basic beliefs? That is the subject facing the Supreme Court of the United States. This article will walk you through the double-speak of the left as they present to the Supreme Court.
As Written By Robin Ridless for the American Thinker:
Last week’s New York Times piece by Jennifer Finney Boylan, “The Masterpiece Cakeshop Case Is Not About Religious Freedom,” floored me with the number of distortions it crowded into a few paragraphs. I can only conclude that the left’s discourse and values have become so wayward and impoverished that they would rather criminalize creativity than take on the serious issues the Supreme Court will be hearing on December 5.
Boylan begins with a dark narrative about the pharmacy Boylan frequents, “run by a conservative Republican.” (Is there any other kind?) Will he refuse to fill the demanded prescription, Boylan quails, “given my condition”? What condition is that? I wondered, as clearly each reader was meant to – compulsive self-dramatizing syndrome?
Thus begins Boylan’s parade of horribles. If Phillips wins in his appeal from lower court decisions, sick babies will die, HIV patients will be turned away from treatment clinics, pre-Civil Rights abominations will become the order of the day. Except none of these scenarios is backed up with citations from the court papers. There’s a good reason for that. They’re not in there. But after all, what do facts matter when it comes to the left’s self-suffering legerdemain?
Does Colorado’s state public accommodations law as applied to Jack Phillips’s refusal to accept a commission for a cake for two men trying to marry each other regulate speech or conduct? Under First Amendment law, the latter is permitted. The former, with minimal exceptions, is not.
That is the threshold question…..
KEEP READING THERE IS EVEN MORE HERE: