Subscription Preferences:

What’s at stake in the Masterpiece Cakeshop Supreme Court decision


(Pixabay)

 

 

 

 

 

Listen to the 10 min audio

Read the transcript:

TOM LAMPRECHT: Harry, I’d like to take you back to a subject we covered about a week ago. It was the oral arguments concerning Jack Phillips’ Masterpiece Cakeshop that went before the Supreme Court.

David French wrote a piece in the National Review entitled “Four Promising Takeaways from the Masterpiece Cakeshop Oral Argument.” He makes some interesting observations about what the Justices asked and where their questions might lead as we await a decision by the Supreme Court.

DR. REEDER: Not only him, but John Stonestreet, as well as a couple of other opinion piece writers, they all make their case and then they qualify it by saying many people have been terribly disappointed and misled by trying to read the oral arguments.

And, most poignantly, not the presentation, but the interruptions. And the Supreme Court Justices, by the way, love to interrupt in a way to try to find out is the lawyer really on their point or not. Well, what was really interesting, of course, was Justice Ginsberg’s question in the oral arguments, “Well what if a homosexual couple had come in just to buy something off the shelf?”

Well, immediately, the lawyer said to Justice Ginsberg what Jack Phillips has been saying all along, “Well not only would I sell it, I have sold many of my items to those who would be practicing homosexuality or even those who have been engaged in a same-sex marriage.”

When you are asked to shape and sculpt a cake for a particular purpose that becomes a matter of artistic expression which, historically, has been covered under the issue of free speech and that you are not coerced to engaged in speech that you don’t want to make, nor are you prevented from speech that you desire to make.

Justice Kennedy the pivotal vote

Where everyone really is focused, Tom, is upon Justice Kennedy because he is pretty well considered the swing vote on this. And both sides look with expectation – the side of those who are declaring that Jack Phillips does not have the right to withhold his participation in the ceremonial development and expression of a same-sex marriage cake that he was requested to make are saying that it’s a matter that he’s hiding behind the freedom of religion that’s really bigotry.

In other words, all of these thousands of years that we have believed that marriage is one man and one woman for one life has actually been a veil of bigotry – that somehow, we have been enlightened now that sexual behavior is now a civil right and a part of one’s being.

And you’re going to find that coming forward through this argument called “the argument of dignity.” In other words, you are denying someone’s dignity if you do not affirm and celebrate in their sexual choices.

Your sexual behavior is not your being, your sexual behavior is something that you’re doing. And the doing reflects your being and that is made in the image of God. You have the ability to do sex as God designed it to be done, which is in the context of a marriage.

Well, interestingly, Justice Kennedy, who has also been an advocate of “gay rights” has also been an advocate of freedom of speech. His question pointed in that direction because he particularly focused on the civil rights commission and their denigrating statements concerning Mr. Phillips’ choice.

And when Mr. Kennedy pointed out that not only did one, but two of these commissioners make such statements declaring that Mr. Phillips’ embracing of his right in terms of what he should speak and what he can’t speak is a matter of bigotry, that is exactly what Justice Kennedy questioned is that they would question the dignity of Mr. Phillips concerning his embracing of the right of free speech.

TOM LAMPRECHT: Justice Kennedy asked the question, “Commissioner Rice says, ‘Freedom of religion is used to justify discrimination is a despicable piece of rhetoric.’” Kennedy asked about that and then, also, Justice Gorsuch picked up and ran with that, as well.

DR. REEDER: And so you’ve got to connect the dots, here. Jack Phillips is saying, “My freedom of speech right means that I don’t have to participate in something that I religiously believe is inappropriate.”

Justice Kennedy, when he wrote in the Obergefell Decision, he wrote in that the fact that the people’s right to believe that it is wrong must be honored and if they believe that it is a wrong behavior, they must not be coerced to support it.

And so now we’re about to find out is Justice Kennedy not only for the fact that homosexuality should not be banned, but he is also on record as saying that those who religiously disagree with homosexuality should not be required to participate. And we’re about to find out, does he believe his own statement in original opinions that he has written concerning these issues.

TOM LAMPRECHT: Harry, all of these authors of these different articles that we’ve referenced today have said be careful when you try to look into the crystal ball and try to make a prediction, because oftentimes even though the questions the justices ask might lead you down a road to one conclusion, oftentimes you’re disappointed. Dare you go out and speculate?

DR. REEDER: I’m loathed to speculate right now. I’m praying. I’m praying that this is a broad opinion that affirms the free speech and free practice of religion of Mr. Phillips. Not a narrow one that is just associated with this one wedding cake.

I have two concerns. Of course, obviously, that his right to freedom of speech in terms of being coerced in his artistic expression to do that which he does not believe is right and, therefore, an attack upon freedom of religion – that we have the freedom to believe that sexuality in Christianity is to be within the bounds within a heterosexual marriage – that is what I am praying the decision is going to uphold.

Not just a narrow one in terms of wedding cakes itself, which means we’ll be back in the Supreme Court very soon on some other issue. I’m praying for that. I do believe Justice Kennedy is going to be the pivotal vote where he is going to come out.

I think those who affirm the First Amendment should be somewhat encouraged from what he’s saying because he went so far as to say when one of the lawyers, Mr. Cole, who is declaring that Jack Phillips’ belief is an attack against their dignity, it was Justice Kennedy in the oral arguments that said, “What they do sexually is not their identity, it’s what they’re doing. Sex is what you’re doing, it’s not who you are.”

He is the one who himself affirms that sexuality is not a matter of being, it is a matter of doing and so, as I said, my hope is that Justice Kennedy is going to uphold his previous declarations that laws against homosexual practice should not preclude freedom of speech and freedom of religion within Christianity, thereby, coercing Christians to artistically support homosexuality and same-sex marriage and/or compromise our beliefs that God has revealed very clearly that sex is a gift from Him, sacred, to be used in the boundaries of marriage between a man and a woman committed for life. Let me just say I have more hope now after the oral arguments than I did before.

Dr. Harry L. Reeder III is the Senior Pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham.

This podcast was transcribed by Jessica Havin. Jessica is editorial assistant for Yellowhammer News. Jessica has transcribed some of the top podcasts in the country and her work has been featured in a New York Times Bestseller.

print

5 mins ago

UA Study — State crash data shows seat belt use critical in saving lives

Those involved in auto crashes while not wearing seat belts are 40 times more likely to die than those who buckle up, according to an analysis of state crash records from the past five years.

For the study, University of Alabama researchers at the Center for Advanced Public Safety examined crash records from 2013 through 2017 provided by the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, or ALEA.

Crash records showed about one out of every 25 unrestrained motorists involved in a crash will suffer a fatal injury, but only about one out of every 1,000 restrained motorists involved in a crash will have a fatal injury. This means that people are 40 times more likely to be killed without restraints.

383

One reason for this is those ejected from vehicles during crashes have 50 times the death rate as those who remain in the vehicles, and the probability of being thrown from vehicles increases about 337 times for those not restrained.

“There is no doubt that seat belts are the most effective way of reducing the chances of getting killed in a crash,” said Dr. David Brown, a research associate at CAPS who led the study. “The chances of avoiding a crash altogether that involves injury over your driving lifetime is very low, so these are not just hypothetical or extreme examples. They are real life-and-death probabilities.”

Along with an increased chance of dying in a crash if unrestrained, there is an increased chance of serious injury. About one in seven unrestrained motorists involved in a crash will sustain a serious injury, while only about one in 50 properly restrained motorists will have a serious injury.

The chances of serious injury for those unrestrained increase by more than a factor of seven. For those who buckle up, nine out of 10 are not injured during a crash.

Some of the other interesting factors include driver and passenger demographics and other correlations:

–Those between the ages 17 and 36 are unrestrained significantly more than average.
–Males are about twice as likely to be unrestrained as females.
–If all back-seat occupants were properly restrained, it would result in an estimated saving of 62 lives per year in Alabama.
–Unrestrained drivers are about 2.5 times more likely to have their crashes in the rural areas than in the cities.

Brown said there are many things drivers should do to prevent severe traffic crashes in addition to the use of seatbelts. They include, in the order of ability to prevent fatal crashes:

–Slowing down, as the probability of fatality doubles for every 10 mph increase.
–Pulling over to a safe stopping point until distractions, such as cell phones, are resolved.
–Never driving or riding with anyone who has had any alcohol or who has taken any mind-altering drugs, even if prescribed.
–Anticipating and avoiding bad weather, especially when coupled with darkness.
–Watching for deer if traveling just after dark and slowing down.
–Driving defensively to reduce risk by putting distance between others vehicles, staying out of the blind spots of large trucks and letting aggressive drivers pass.

(Courtesy of the University of Alabama)

34 mins ago

Alabamian Davey Allison named to NASCAR Hall of Fame along with Jeff Gordon, Alan Kulwicki, Jack Roush, Roger Penske

On Wednesday, NASCAR announced the five inductees who will make up its 2019 Hall of Fame class. Among those is Hueytown native Davey Allison, the son of Bobby Allison, who is also a NASCAR Hall of Famer.

Allison compiled 19 race wins and 14 pole positions in stock car racing premiere series before his death in a tragic helicopter accident in 1993. He won his first race at Talladega Superspeedway in the 1987 Winston 500. He would win at his home track two more times, in 1989 and 1992. Allison’s biggest win came at the 1992 Daytona 500.

The late Allison is joined by Jeff Gordon, Jack Roush, Roger Penske and the late Alan Kulwicki to complete the 2019 class.

62

The induction weekend is set for Jan. 31, 2019 through Saturday, Feb. 2, 2019 at the NASCAR Hall of Fame in Charlotte, N.C. The ceremony will take place on Feb. 1, 2019.

Watch — Allison wins 1992’s The Winston All-Star Race at Charlotte Motor Speedway:

@Jeff_Poor is a graduate of Auburn University and is the editor of Breitbart TV.

2 hours ago

Auburn defeats Ole Miss 9-3 in SEC Tournament

Edouard Julien hit a grand slam Wednesday as No. 7 seed Auburn defeated No. 2 seed Mississippi 9-3 in the Southeastern Conference Tournament.

Auburn (39-19) remains in the winners’ bracket in the double-elimination portion of the tournament and faces No. 11 seed Texas A&M (38-19) on Thursday. Ole Miss (42-15) meets No. 3 seed Georgia (37-18) in an elimination game Thursday.

Auburn scored nine runs in the final three innings to rally from a 2-0 deficit.

88

Julien capped the outburst with his grand slam in the ninth. On Tuesday, he had the game-winning hit in the 11th inning against Kentucky.

Auburn’s Conor Davis and Jay Estes each drove in two runs. Ole Miss’ Jacob Adams scored twice.

Auburn starter Tanner Burns (6-4) allowed three runs — one earned — in seven innings. Ole Miss reliever Greer Holston (2-1) took the loss after allowing one unearned run without retiring a batter.

(Associated Press, copyright 2018)

Sign-up now for our daily newsletter and never miss another article from Yellowhammer News.

15 hours ago

20 percent of Americans have known someone suffering from opioid addiction

A federal survey reveals roughly 20 percent of Americans know or have known someone struggling with addiction to opioid painkillers.

The annual report on the economic well being of U.S. households by the Federal Reserve System included questions regarding exposure to opioids, a first in the history of the survey. It found at least one in five Americans personally know someone suffering with an addiction to opioids, reported The Hill.

While the study revealed that white people are roughly twice as likely to be impacted by opioid abuse, the results also showed opioid addiction does not discriminate along socioeconomic lines.

275

“Adults who have been personally exposed to the opioid epidemic have somewhat less favorable assessments of economic conditions than those who have not been exposed,” said researchers, according to The Hill. “However, local unemployment rates are similar in the neighborhoods where those exposed to opioids live and where those not exposed live. Altogether, this analysis suggests the need to look beyond economic conditions to understand the roots of the current opioid epidemic.”

The researchers noted that a majority of adults impacted by the opioid epidemic have a positive view of their local economy.

Drug overdoses are now the leading cause of accidental death for Americans under age 50, killing more than 64,000 people in 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The increase is driven primarily by opioids, which claimed 42,249 lives in 2016, a 28-percent increase over the roughly 33,000 lives lost to opioids in 2015.

Opioid overdoses made up a staggering 66 percent of all drug overdose deaths in 2016, surpassing the annual number of lives lost to breast cancer. Deaths from synthetic opioids like fentanyl, a painkiller about 50 to 100 times more powerful than morphine, experienced a particularly dramatic increase, more than doubling from 9,580 lives in 2015 to 19,413 lives in 2016.

The epidemic is contributing to declining life expectancy in the U.S., officials said. Life expectancy dropped for the second consecutive year in 2016 for the first time since an outbreak of influenza in 1962 and 1963.

(Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.)

16 hours ago

Alabama teacher charged with having sex with student

A statement from police says 54-year-old Meta Lovely of Duncanville surrendered Wednesday. She is being held on $30,000 bond on a charge of having sex with a student less than 19 years old.

Lovely worked as a substitute teacher at Bryant High School.

Police say they were told about a possible improper relationship between a school employee and a student on May 2.

32

A lawyer representing Lovely, Mary Turner, says her client is innocent and “adamantly” denies the allegations.

(Associated Press, copyright 2018)

Sign-up now for our daily newsletter and never miss another article from Yellowhammer News.