Judge Rules Against Jack Phillips In Latest Masterpiece Cakeshop Case … Here’s The 411

Written by Wes Walker on June 18, 2021

Become a Clash Insider!

Big Tech is clamping down on conservative media big time. Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Taking your case to the Supreme Court and winning should be the end of the story, shouldn’t it? In Jack Phillip’s case, no. The left is desperate to make an ‘example’ of him as a warning to others.

On the same day his victory was handed down, a new trap was laid for him. We do not use the term ‘trap’ lightly. As you read on, you will see that this was intended as punishment for his court win.

The conservative group representing Colorado baker Jack Phillips vowed to appeal after a judge sided with the plaintiff, a transgender woman, on Tuesday following Phillips’ refusal to make a cake celebrating a gender transition.

“In this case, an activist attorney demanded Jack create custom cakes in order to ‘test’ Jack and ‘correct the errors’ of his thinking, and the activist even threatened to sue Jack again if the case is dismissed for any reason,” Alliance Defending Freedom General Counsel Kristen Waggoner said in a statement. “Radical activists and government officials are targeting artists like Jack because they won’t promote messages on marriage and sexuality that violate their core convictions.” — FoxNews

This wasn’t an instance of just wanting a cake and getting refused. This was the targeting of a man who has gone on record for not making cakes celebrating ideas with his artistic talents that conflict with his moral compass. This includes ‘divorce party’ cakes and even Halloween-themed cakes.

They knew he wouldn’t make a cake celebrating gender transition, and that was the very reason they ordered one. The judge ruled this to be a ‘violation of discrimination laws’ and fined him $500 for refusing to bake the cake.

It could be asked whether singling out a man whose Constitutionally-protected religious convictions activists object to and using the courts to deliberately drive him into bankruptcy might qualify as ‘discrimination’… but that might involve asking reasonable questions.

Not so long ago, the left mocked the ‘slippery slope’ objections coming from the political right, especially among religious conservatives who had seen the demonizing of traditional values on the horizon.

In 2012, Obama assured us he defended traditional marriage. Now, in 2021, Democrats have changed official legal documents to use the term ‘birthing person’ in place of the ‘offensive’ and divisive term ‘mother’.

There has been a rapid cultural, political, and legal shift from simply ‘tolerating’ a non-traditional viewpoint, to accepting it, to forcing those who disagree with the idea to accept the new orthodoxy — or else.

SCOTUS even acknowledged that this is exactly what we saw play out in a case they ruled on this week in Fulton v. Philadelphia where Catholic foster homes who did not accept same-sex couples as potential foster parents in their system. Jack Phillips’s case, like the Fulton v. Philadelphia case, gave a very narrow protection for religious exercise of freedoms, not the broader protection of their right to act on conscience.

This serves to invite activists to continue with brazen malicious court filings whose purpose is to force ‘heretics’ who do not accept their new secular orthodoxy to bow the knee and punish those who do not accept their doctrine as absolute… forcing them to pledge fealty to the state rather than to God or Conscience.

And he is right. The case of Jack Phillips from Masterpiece Cakeshop proves the point. Justice Gorsuch highlighted this in his separate concurrence, which Justices Alito and Thomas also joined.

“After being forced to litigate all the way to the Supreme Court, we ruled for him on narrow grounds similar to those the majority invokes today,” Justice Gorsuch wrote. Specifically, in that case, “because certain government officials responsible for deciding Mr. Phillips’s compliance with a local public accommodations law uttered statements exhibiting hostility to his religion, the Court held, those officials failed to act ‘neutrally’ under Smith.”

However, “with Smith still on the books,” Justice Gorsuch added, “all that victory assured Mr. Phillips was a new round of litigation—with officials now presumably more careful about admitting their motives.” That is precisely what Phillips faces now, being fined and again hauled into court for refusing to craft a “gender transition cake.” — The Federalist, Margot Cleveland

Jack will be filing an appeal. The fight continues.

Check out ClashRadio for more wit and wisdom from ClashDaily’s Big Dawg. While you’re at it, here’s his latest book:

If Masculinity Is ‘Toxic’, Call Jesus Radioactive

Much of the Left loathes masculinity and they love to paint Jesus as a non-offensive bearded woman who endorses their agenda. This book blows that nonsense all to hell. From the stonking laptop of bestselling author, Doug Giles, comes a new book that focuses on Jesus’ overt masculine traits like no other books have heretofore. It’s informative, bold, hilarious, and scary. Giles has concluded, after many years of scouring the scripture that, If Masculinity Is ‘Toxic’, Call Jesus Radioactive.