This Landmark Decision Could Eradicate Traditional Values

Every day, conservative parents must stand strong against the onslaught of the liberal agenda so prevalent in our culture, teaching our children to treasure our traditional values.

Liberal propaganda has been spreading like wildfire in recent decades, crumbling the foundation on which our nation was founded and endangering our God-given rights.

And now, a landmark case is being heard at the U.S. Supreme Court that could set a precedent to determine whether our family values and religious liberties – liberties protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution – will be preserved for future generations.

A Christian business owner has been defending himself against persecution from the left since he declined to bake a cake for a homosexual couple’s wedding. Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado states that his First Amendment rights allowed him to decline providing this service, which is offensive to his religious beliefs.

It remains to be seen what the High Court will decide in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The case comes to the Supreme Court following Phillips’ appeal of a lower court’s decision that his actions violate state discrimination laws.

The liberal ACLU is representing Craig and Dave Mullins, the same-sex couple who claimed discrimination and brought a civil rights complaint against the business owner.  Phillips’ attorneys have mounted a powerful defense saying the case is being mislabeled as discrimination, while it is, in fact, Phillips’ rights that are being violated.

The Daily Signal reported:

There is a clear legal distinction in declining to express a message and refusing to serve a class of people, legal experts said regarding the case of a Colorado baker that declined to design and bake a cake for a same-sex wedding.

“Sexual orientation discrimination laws are being misused right now in a way to silence and punish those who have religious convictions about marriage being between a man and a woman,” said Kristen Waggoner, who argued before the Supreme Court Tuesday on behalf of the baker Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop.

Waggoner, a senior vice president of Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious liberty legal group, added that Phillips was willing to sell other products and provide other services to the LGBT community, just not a wedding cake. Not being a vendor for same-sex weddings is similar to Phillips’ decision not to do Halloween cakes or cakes that celebrate a divorce, Waggoner said.

“They serve everyone, but they can’t express all messages that violate those religious convictions about marriage,” Waggoner continued, speaking at a forum at The Heritage Foundation Wednesday. “We have clients that are literally facing jail time in Minnesota and Arizona because they won’t express messages about marriage that violate their conscience,” she continued.

The importance of this case cannot be overexpressed.  If the Supreme Court finds that Phillips is guilty of discrimination, it will be the first fracture of our Constitution.  A decision against Phillips could pave the way to limit the speech and religious freedoms of any American, granting the federal government a frightening new authority to control its citizens.

Attorneys for Phillips are emphasizing the difference between denying a service due to discrimination and deciding not to support a cause that defies your religious beliefs.

The Daily Signal continued:

[Waggoner] added that the Colorado commission has accused Phillips of being akin to perpetrators of the Holocaust and slave owners, but the commission has demonstrated bias in other cases.

“Creating expressive products is constitutionally different than non-expressive activities like delivering food, renting out ballrooms, or driving limousines,” Ilya Shapiro, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, said during The Heritage Foundation forum. “We might want, or there might be, different kind of defenses for those types of businesses, be they statutorily or constitutional. But they don’t resound in the freedom of speech.”

He said using the government to stamp out dissenting views should cause concern. “Fundamentally there is a difference between denying a service to certain kinds of people and declining to convey a particular message,” Shapiro added. “I don’t even know why you would want to have as your wedding vendor someone who can’t in good faith—literally—support your union.”

Legal precedent is that the legal presumption lies with liberty in lieu of a compelling state interest, Cohen continued. He made references to the Statue of Liberty, President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and Patrick Henry.

“We do not have in New York Harbor a ‘Statue of Inclusion’ and the 16th president did not in his most famous address refer to this as a nation conceived in giving no offense,” Cohen said. “And Patrick Henry did not rise in the Virginia House of Burgess and proclaim, ‘Give me a safe place or give me death.’ Rather, all of these major emblematic utterances in our history privileged liberty as a foundational principle.”

The arguments continue at the nations’ highest court, and if the lower court decision is upheld, conservative families and business owners will be open to limitless persecution for our values, our faith, and our traditions.

A government who prosecutes its citizens for expressing their opinions is a horrifying prospect indeed.  The future of our children and grandchildren could be forever altered because of a growing liberal wave of oppression.

Mommy Underground will keep you updated on the outcome of this case.  What do you think of this landmark Supreme Court case?  Are you frightened for the future of our traditional values?  Leave us your thoughts in the comments section.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*