Oregon Bakers Take Their Religious Freedom Case to the Supreme Court

I’m going to hold this one up in prayer. The injustice inflicted upon the Klein family by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) should have never stood in a nation that claims to have freedom of religion and speech.

And no matter your political persuasion or religious beliefs (or lack of), this is something we should be in agreement on. It absolutely is of a concern of every American, because if it happened to them, there may come a time when it is turned on any one of us.

For those who aren’t sure who Melissa and Aaron Klein are, they’re the Oregon couple who once operated a bakery in Gresham, Oregon called Sweetcakes by Melissa.

I say “once operated” because a vile lawsuit in 2013 and the subsequent social justice decision forced them out of business.

They were sued by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, on behalf of a lesbian couple who claimed “mental rape” when the Kleins – who are Christians – refused to bake a cake for their wedding, based on their religious beliefs about marriage.

The agency cited Oregon’s nondiscrimination law in bringing their case.

The Kleins lost that suit and were ordered to pay a $135,000 fine.

Here’s the twist that the initial court ruling ignored:

The lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, were not discriminated against. At all.

They had previously been served at Sweetcakes by Melissa with no problem. They’d even ordered a wedding cake there before. That cake was for Cryer’s mother, who was marrying a man.

There is, in fact, no record of the Kleins ever turning anyone away for any other purpose, including sexual orientation.

Their problem was with baking a cake that would look like participation in, or approval of something that goes against God’s word on marriage.

They’ve been given new hope recently, however.

This past summer, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of another Christian baker, Jack Phillips, of Masterpiece Cakeshop, in Colorado.

He refused to sanction a gay wedding by participating and baking a cake, which, of course, got him sued.

The Supreme Court handed down a 7-2 ruling in his favor.

In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that “[s]tates cannot punish protected speech because some group finds it offensive, hurtful, stigmatic, unreasonable, or undignified.”

And of course, the LGBT mafia just couldn’t bear to allow opposing views stand, so they went at Phillips again. This time, he’s being sued for refusing to create a transgender-themed cake.

Meanwhile, however, the Kleins have decided to take their case to the Supreme Court, in order to defend the First Amendment rights that Oregon so happily trampled upon.

First Liberty Institute and Boyden Gray & Associates have taken up their case.

“Free Americans should not be compelled by the government to create a message that conflicts with their deepest convictions,” Ambassador C. Boyden Gray said in a statement.

And this is true.

As was pointed out, the Kleins did not discriminate. They had served their community, right up to the point that they were asked to act in violation of their religious beliefs.

After refusing to participate by making a cake for a gay wedding, it was Cryer’s mother who apparently confronted Aaron Klein.

After Cryer and her mother left the store, the appeal explains that the mother returned to confront Aaron Klein about his religious beliefs on marriage. The mother admitted that she used to hold the same beliefs about marriage but that “truth had changed” and that she believed the Bible was silent on same-sex marriage.

Truth doesn’t change.

“After she finished, Aaron expressed religious disagreement and quoted a Bible verse in support of his position,” the court document reads. “As BOLI found, Aaron quoted a verse from the Book of Leviticus: ‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.’ Rachel’s mother ended the conversation, returned to her car, and told Rachel (inaccurately) that Aaron had called her ‘an abomination.'”

There are so many verses he could have used to better make his point. He wasn’t wrong, but that word, “abomination” really freaks people who have no relationship with God out.

It all begins in Genesis 2, verses 21-24:

^“21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. ²² Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

²³ The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.’ ²⁴ That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” (NIV)

If you want something more New Testament, Jesus, in his own words, spoke of marriage in Matthew 19:4-6. Specifically, he was addressing the Pharisees, who were testing him on the subject of divorce.

“⁴ He replied, ‘Have you never read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, ⁵ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined inseparably to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? ⁶ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.’ “ (AMP)

He was very specific to point out that God created them “male and female.” That final line about what God has joined together, let no one separate can absolutely be applied beyond just the topic of divorce.

If Mr. Klein had wanted to engage in a long and thorough Apologetics discussion with Ms. Cryer, he could have made that point.

God created them, man and woman, for a purpose. They were created from the same flesh, to compliment and help each other. Who would dream of coming between what God meant for our good?

Marriage is God-created, with eternal purpose. It is a mirror of the church and its relationship with Christ. It is the foundation for strong societies, so of course, no Christian wants to be seen as violating that covenant.

But Christians get divorced! A-HA!

Yeah. I’m just saving some of my less sanctified readers the trouble.

It does happen, and it is one of the tragedies of the church. Christians mess up, all the time, but we press in and seek God’s face, no matter our failings. We keep trying. Divorce is a tricky subject, and one day I may address that for those who will surely be bringing it up, but for now, let’s get back to the Kleins.

The lesbian couple who sued the Kleins out of business didn’t go cake-less. They found a bakery that would accommodate them, with no problem.

But then, it wasn’t about the cake. Don’t let anyone fool you.

It was about crushing a Christian business.

This is the same reaction you see from the LGBT anti-free speech bullies when a Chik-Fil-A opens. They can’t simply not go to Chik-Fil-A. They have to object to its existence, all because of the Christian beliefs of the owners.

What the BOLI did, however, was more than just sue the Kleins for their refusal to bake a cake.

They even went so far as to order them to “cease and desist” talking about their faith, as the reason they could not bake the gay wedding cake.

Free speech for me, but not for thee.

The Kleins appealed the BOLI order to the Oregon Court of Appeals in 2016. The court upheld the BOLI order but reversed the gag order. The Kleins also appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court but that appeal was denied in June.

“Freedom of speech has always included the freedom not to speak the government’s message,” said Kelly Shackelford, CEO of First Liberty Institute, a national legal group aiding the Kleins in the case. “This case can clarify whether speech is truly free if it is government mandated.”

So with Jack Phillips’ case as their encouragement, the Kleins are trying again.

Will it work?

In the case of Jack Phillips, his win was on narrow ground. The laughably titled Colorado Civil Rights Commission couldn’t hide their revulsion at the notion of Christians holding to Christian standards and let that hostility slip out into the open. The court slammed them for it.

In other words, you can’t bring a lawsuit against someone for discrimination, while putting your own biased ugliness on full display.

If you attack Christians for their beliefs, how are you not biased and hypocritical?

The Kleins should win this case. Nothing they did stopped the wedding. They were not under compulsion to participate and bake a cake. They had not refused service for any other purpose, except what they felt violated their beliefs.

What happened to them was an injustice, and the hope is that put in the hands of SCOTUS, they can have the win that was denied them.