Letter to the editor: Thanks, but I disagree

Thanks, but I disagree

Received Feb. 21

I greatly appreciate Ann Delmastro extending the courtesy of reading and responding to my commentary. Still, I disagree with the content.

The legal issue in “Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission” isn’t baking a cake. The ACLU website on the case begins with “this has never been about a cake.” As I detailed in my Dec. 16, 2017 Commentary, Jack Phillips did not refuse to sell David Mullins and Charlie Craig a wedding cake. He offered to sell them several. They demanded a specialty cake including an explicit endorsement of their-same sex marriage.

Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, signed into law by President Clinton establishing the strict standards of Sherbert v. Vermont (US Supreme Court 1963) before violating a person’s religious beliefs. Obergefell v Hodges (US Supreme Court 2015) explicitly granted Phillips as a religious person the right to be faithful to his own deep religious aspirations; and prohibited same-sex marriages from impacting third parties including Phillips.

As far as “my rights end where your rights begin,” a couple’s legal right to celebrate same-sex marriage ends where Phillips’ lawful religious convictions begin.

There has to be a country where both LGBTTQU and religious people can live free of government persecution. It doesn’t have to be mutually exclusive.

Mullins and Craig certainly didn’t follow the teachings of Jesus regarding turning the other cheek. Securing legal representation in advance, they went looking for a fight, from bakery to bakery, until they finally found it.

(Word count: 245)


Idaho Falls