Letter to Human Rights Campaign
Updated: Jun 27
The fate of religious freedom, especially Christian freedom, hangs in the balance with an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case: Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal organization supporting Masterpiece Cakeshop, summarizes it like this:
Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, is not in the business of turning away any person. In fact, when two men came into his shop one summer afternoon asking Jack to design a custom cake for their same-sex wedding, Jack gave them the same answer that he would give someone requesting a custom cake for a Halloween party or bachelor party: He can’t design custom art that celebrates an event or expresses messages that conflict with his faith. But he’d be happy to create something else for them.
Shortly after that, the couple sued Jack for supposedly discriminating against them. Alliance Defending Freedom is defending Jack’s religious and artistic freedom at the U.S. Supreme Court. Learn more at JusticeForJack.org.
–Alliance Defending Freedom[i]
I made the case in an earlier blog post that the LGBT movement is a religious movement. The movement is the religion of humanism veiled behind the mask of “civil rights.” Consider the consequences if Jack loses this case. If Jack were to lose, then that would empower the LGBT movement to force anyone at any time to conform to their humanist agenda, or else face various forms of punishment. That's an easy way to essentially outlaw Christianity. The fact that the humanist agenda is so well hidden behind the veil of "civil rights" is something that burns a fire within me. The largest LGBT organization, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), led two amicus briefs against Masterpiece Cakeshop.[ii] Therefore, I decided to send them a message.
I sent the message below to HRC via Facebook and e-mail, but I have yet to receive a response. I suppose I should not be surprised if I do not ever receive a response back.
I have a message and a few questions for you, and I am writing to you with the intent of having respectful dialogue and debate. I understand that you advertise yourselves as a “civil rights” organization. By categorizing homosexual and transgender issues as “civil rights,” I assume you categorize homosexual and transgender desires with physical characteristics such as ethnicity, skin color, and so forth. Consequently, if a cake baker, such as Mr. Jack Phillips, refuses to decorate a wedding cake in a manner that celebrates homosexual marriage, you view this as civil rights-related discrimination against the customer(s). However, the following hypothetical scenario may demonstrate that this is more properly defined as a religious issue than a civil rights issue.
Let’s say there is a bakery owner who holds humanist beliefs and supports gay marriage. As even your website acknowledges, the religion of Humanism is in line with LGBT beliefs. Your website mentions the LGBTQ Humanist Council, and how one of their main purposes is to “…promote the humanist philosophy and values…” (http://www.hrc.org/resources/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-humanism). Now, let’s say this bakery owner is asked to decorate a cake with a message that supports the biblical view of marriage as one man and one woman. In response, the bakery owner respectfully declines because it goes against his/her religious views. Now, let’s say the customer is not happy and chooses to sue the bakery owner. Below are my questions for you:
1. Should the state force the bakery owner to decorate the cake with a message that supports the biblical view of marriage, despite the bakery owner’s humanist beliefs?
2. If the state rules against the bakery owner, and the owner has to bake/decorate the cake or be forced to pay thousands of dollars in fines, does this not adversely impact the free exercise of the bakery owner’s religious (humanist) beliefs?
3. When considering this hypothetical scenario, might it be true that the HRC is actually promoting a moral, religious agenda when pressuring individuals and corporations to support moral positions such as homosexual marriage?
4. In the religion of Christianity, the Bible is used as the ultimate standard to define right and wrong. In the religion of Humanism, “…human nature and experience alone” is used to define right and wrong, according to the Bristol Humanist Group (https://americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/definition-of-humanism/). By what standard does the HRC judge homosexual and transgender behaviors as morally right?
In regards to Question #4, I can’t image what other standard the HRC submits to other than “…human nature and experience alone.” That is the essence of the religion of humanism. I pray that the Supreme Court, and the rest of America, will come to recognize the unconstitutional agenda of the LGBT movement as they try to force others to conform to their religious, humanist worldview.
Although the HRC did not respond to my message, I recently posed a question to humanists on the American Humanist Association Facebook page that is similar to Question #1 above. I received some responses so far, and I will share that discussion in my next post.
[i] This quote is from the “Justice for Jack Phillips” YouTube video description which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfshnP_yqsQ&feature=youtu.be