November 20, 2017
The wedding cake case is not religious discrimination
To the editor:
Brett Younger’s analysis (“Questions the court should ask the baker’s lawyer”) of the pending Supreme Court case in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission could not be more on point. We are plagued these days by whiny Christians claiming religious persecution disguised as discrimination. In Hobby Lobby the discriminated class was women and their right to have contraceptives included in health insurance plans. Women lost that one in a 5-4 Supreme Court decision based on faulty reasoning.
This time the victims are a gay couple refused a wedding cake on the sole basis of their sexual orientation. Younger is right to note that religious persecution has nothing to do with this case. It is rather a matter of simple and grievous discrimination.
None of the enumerated rights in the Constitution is absolute, including that of free exercise of religion. Masterpiece Cakeshop is a good example. Here the larger societal interest of nondiscrimination should prevail over a dubious claim of free exercise.
Stan Hastey, West Palm Beach, Fla.