Since when is Jack Phillips the anointed representative of "Yeshua"? You really think "Yeshua" is cheering this yokel on?
This is, let's not forget, all about baking a lousy cake. Better to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court rather than bake a cake for a homosexual couple.
Do folks outside the cocoon of discussion boards like this realize how petty and mean this baker appears?
It isn't about baking a
lousy cake. Someone with no morals might have done just that. Instead, the baker refused to do a job. It's about forcing someone to channel their creative energies, skill, and talent into creating something to celebrate something they feel is JUST WRONG, and can back that with centuries old religious scripture bolstering long held beliefs.
Would they have gone to a Muslim Baker for a "wedding cake" for a homosexual union, knowing the Islamic teachings about homosexuality? Or instead of winning the 'head in the gutter prize' or racing to the ground from the roof of tall buildings, they decided they could sue the Christians for simply not baking it, (a civil and nonviolent refusal).
Doubtless, the baker was specifically targeted for his beliefs. There were other bakers around, and one of them likely would have welcomed the business. This was a premeditated assault on the Religious liberty guaranteed by the First Amendment, and the First Amendment Right to speak freely through his art--or NOT SAY ANYTHING AT ALL.
There is a law against conspiring to deprive someone of fundamental civil rights, and I would say two out of the protected Rights in the First Amendment qualify. 18 U.S. Code § 241
There is another law which covers deprivation of Rights under color of Law: 18 U.S. Code § 242
I'm sure a shrewd attorney could turn the tables in this case.
In any sane court, the enumerated right to freely hold, and practice according to, his Religious beliefs and the enumerated and sui juris right to freedom to express as he sees fit (including not at all) through his trade work in any given instance, should trump the court decreed 'right' to coerce others to act against their religious beliefs or create something to 'celebrate' a union they find abhorrent.
If it can be shown to the satisfaction of the court (and there are Civil provisions as well, where a mere preponderance of evidence is needed, not reasonable doubt) that the 'couple' specifically targeted the baker because of his Christian beliefs, I owuld thing the Baker would be able to sue all the parties who have worked together, with malice and forethought, to violate his Civil Rights.