Web designer should not be forced to work on same-sex weddings

In 2018, the Supreme Court heard the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop versus Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the controversial and well-covered case about a Christian baker, Jack Phillips, being punished for refusing to bake a gay wedding cake. The Christian Baker won that case. So you think that would be the end of it? It would settle the debate on the issue? Well, not quite.

The decision is what constitutional scholars call a narrow ruling. This means that the decision made in that case only applies to that case and is not a precedent for future rulings. The court noted that the commission’s open hostility toward Phillips religious claims, but they stopped far short of answering the critical questions related to anti-discrimination law and our constitutionally protected religious liberties.

This is a debate that continues. So now, four years later, the Supreme Court is once again faced with this issue, as is the Congress. Recently, the court heard oral arguments regarding a devoutly Christian Colorado web designer, Lorie Smith, and Colorado’s pro-gay laws. Lorie wants to expand her business to serve online wedding registries, but wants to do so in a way that complements her faith.

Unfortunately, that Colorado law makes it nearly impossible. And there at the Supreme Court and the court heard those arguments this past Monday. And sadly, the antics and actions didn’t stop with Lorie. Jack Phillips, the Christian baker, he’s also back in court after being targeted by LGBTQ advocates for refusing to bake a transgender reveal cake. The Supreme Court’s attempt to avoid this issue and kick the can down the road has hurt us.

It’s only served the purpose of making both sides really, really angry. And now it’s spilling out into the Congress. Both the gay rights lobby and the religious community are at odds with each other. And the big question for all of society is, can we co-exist? Can these two groups live in the same country? One can only hope this time that they’ll be a difference, that there’ll be a reconciliation, that religious liberties are religious liberties protected in the Constitution regardless of what the gay activists want.

And as we await the court’s decision, it’s important that all Americans realize what is at risk, because in a free country, you can be compelled to act. However, you can’t be compelled, though, to act against your own faith and have threats from government action. We’re a free country. People are able to choose how they want to live. But now we’re talking about a conflicting worldview.

Is it acceptable for the government to force anyone to promote speech they fundamentally disagree with? We can only hope the court will answer these questions this time with a resounding no. We’ll know next summer. The left will have you believe that intrusions on religious liberties are necessary to protect the LGBTQ community. Similarly, advocates have argued that refusing to subject the religious community to harsh penalties will unleash a wave of racist, sexist and homophobic hate.

This is the lie we should all reject. Both Jack and Lorie never refuse services to the LGBTQ community. They just refused to endorse, promote or facilitate messages that defied their faith. America is a tolerant and loving country. We can have civil disagreements without demonizing each other. Or can we? Because this is coming to a head. Because at core, Lorie Smith and Jack Phillips are simply Christian business owners seeking to earn a living within the bounds of their faith in a free country.

They should be able to do so. They should be able to protect their religious liberties while serving their public without invoking such hatred response from the alphabet mafia that is now attempting to pass their agenda in Congress and have the president of the United States sign it into law.