Perspectives: Totalitarian tolerance, turning a Colorado baker into a thought criminal

Composite image, St. George News

OPINION – Jack Phillips isn’t a household name, but that’s likely to change in the near future. Phillips is the Colorado cake artist whose decision to decline participating in same-sex nuptials has sparked a case that is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Three years ago, when a same-sex couple approached Phillips about creating a cake for their wedding, he informed them he would not be able to fulfill their request. He offered to sell them anything in his shop but reiterated that his personal beliefs would not permit him to be a part of their celebration by creating a custom wedding cake for them.

This proved to be a triggering event for the couple, who stormed out of his shop and promptly launched a jihad against Phillips, culminating in a lawsuit filed with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The commission ordered Phillips to create cakes for same-sex weddings or stop baking them altogether.

That decision was upheld by the Colorado Court of Appeals, but now Phillips’ case is headed to the Supreme Court on the grounds that forcing his participation in a same-sex wedding is a violation of his rights of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

The fact Phillips declined an opportunity to make money by being part of a celebration that is contrary to his values isn’t outrageous. That this particular same-sex couple has sought to harness the power of the state to force him to do so is a genuinely contemptible act.

Unfortunately, the use of government force to coerce conscience is now commonplace in the realm of same-sex activism. How quickly some forget that the detestable Jim Crow laws were also the product of a collectivist ideology backed by the violence of the state.

Legitimate intervention on the part of the state was once properly reserved for instances where the alleged victim could show demonstrable harm had been done. Now, peaceful refusal to be conscripted into participating in a same-sex wedding ceremony is treated as a dangerous thought crime.

Phillips is being punished – not for harming the couple in any objectively measurable way but for refusing to validate their ideology at the expense of his own religious convictions. He’s being forced to choose between his own sacred standards of right and wrong and the prevailing mindset of government.

Most of us, at some point, have been faced with choosing between our conscience and what’s popular. At worst, it may have cost us the approval of our peers or caused us to miss out on some trendy activity.

Today, the potential costs of standing on personal principle are considerably higher, and that’s not by accident. Thoughtful persuasion has been discarded in favor of ideological browbeating and subjugation, all conspicuously backed by the threat of official sanctions.

In Phillips’ case, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruling has cost him a significant amount of business. This isn’t surprising since we live in a time when a person must be prepared to suffer for his or her values, assuming they’re willing to stand for them in the first place.

Those whose personal convictions have never required them to forgo participation in activities that are in clear conflict with their foundational standards most likely have never stood for anything at all.

When his critics smugly claim that Phillips is duty-bound to create cakes for same-sex couples because he is engaged in commerce, they are relying on legalistic impulses rather than right and wrong. Simply opening a business does not subject the proprietor to cultural servitude or economic slavery.

The couple that set in motion this exercise in high drama wasn’t just looking for a wedding cake; they were looking for an excuse to legally bludgeon Phillips or anyone who believes as he does into submission.

This is self-evident from the contrast between how Phillips conducted himself in politely declining the opportunity to create a wedding cake and the disproportionate anger, profanity and totalitarian retaliation unleashed by the unhappy couple and their activist supporters.

Phillips doesn’t use his talents to make custom cakes for bachelor parties, Halloween cakes or cakes that celebrate witchcraft or demons either. He hasn’t sought to prevent anyone from obtaining these types of cakes from his competitors.

He hasn’t picketed the baking establishments that do provide such cakes. He hasn’t sought to impose his convictions on another human being. The fact that he’s drawn the line on what he considers the most appropriate application of his skills doesn’t mean he’s launched a crusade.

He simply has chosen to put his passions, gifts and creative ability to the possible highest use that he can.

If, at any level, you have deeply held ideals you wouldn’t want commandeered for another’s political agenda, then Phillips’ fight is your fight too.

Bryan Hyde is an opinion columnist specializing in current events viewed through the lens of common sense. The opinions stated in this article are his and not representative of St. George News.

Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @youcancallmebry

Copyright St. George News, LLC, 2017, all rights reserved.

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!


  • desertgirl September 25, 2017 at 8:19 am

    Totalitarian tolerance: an oxymoron if there ever was one.

    It is not only political correctness but the new chic to drool over the sex life of all non-heterosexuals; this includes bullying and destroying anyone with a mind of their own or practices non-violent faith in a god. Oh forbid. As the United States marches toward total government control over all the so-called progressives shine as family based society collapses. The irony is the leftist voters and agitators will be some of the first to experience the wrath of government/judicial thought bosses and no personal freedom.

  • cookiemonster September 25, 2017 at 8:20 am

    Wow just wow. I Never thought I would find a topic I would actually agree with you on. Most times I hate what you write.
    It’s terrible really what has become acceptable in the world.
    It would be better for them to accept the job then forgot to do it and give the money back or even do a poor job than actually decline. 1 bad comment vs a parade of hate and bad comments for your beliefs.
    I don’t have any issues with gay marriage couples. I don’t agree with it but everyone should be able to live the life they want.
    Same as this guy not wanting to serve a gay couple. Has the same rights as the gay couple getting married.
    It’s ironic the discrimination to they guy who is being persecuted for his beliefs in not believing in gay marriage is the same as they feel as if they are being persecuted by it.
    Just a bad joke of P/C gone wrong a a generation of whining little girls. Who want to be different but don’t want to be treated different. But then treat people who disagree with them at a greater level of disrespect and make a crap storm out of the matter.

    Bryan I would love to hear your views on the riots vs the police on these cases where it’s obvious that the police were doing there job. But then everyone loots and riots in there own neighborhood as a protest.

    • desertgirl September 25, 2017 at 10:58 am

      Correction. ‘This guy’ didn’t not want to serve the couple he did not want to customize a product in celebration of the wedding that goes against his beliefs; he is quite willing to sell them his products otherwise.

    • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 11:07 am

      Do you understand the difference between protecting the personal liberty of a citizen and the legal parameters placed on businesses to uphold civil rights? The baker is protected individually to the same level as the same-sex couple but once he opened a business he volunteered to adhere to the more restrictive laws that govern business.

      As a caveat, he lost his case at the state level using a different defense and is now trying to frame it as a free speach argument. Will be interesting to see how that proceeds. Plenty of religions preach racial and ethnic discrimination but we tamped those expressions in businesses decades ago. Of sex/gender are protected classes they should get the same legal protections from business discrimination.

  • John September 25, 2017 at 8:30 am

    My sincerely-held religious beliefs prohibit me from baking a cake for a negro. Or selling my house to one. Same rules apply?

    • desertgirl September 25, 2017 at 11:01 am

      You just sound like an intolerant, control freak progressive. If you don’t know the difference it is do your ignorance and lack of regard for others (basically you are a bigot). Can’t fix stupid; you have to fix yourself or remain stupid.

      • theone September 25, 2017 at 12:05 pm

        desertrat umm I mean girl, read your own comment and see if you can fix the stupid in your own ability to fail in knowing the difference.

    • statusquo September 25, 2017 at 12:03 pm

      Race is not a choice, sodomy is. No business should be forced to support a sinful lifestyle choice by anyone

      • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 1:13 pm

        And I am grateful that we have civil rights laws to protect us from your ignorant discrimination.

        • statusquo September 25, 2017 at 2:58 pm

          So much for free speach and tolerance?

          • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 3:55 pm

            Clearly you don’t understand either. Tolerance means I accept that others get to live as citizens with prejudiced views and can even speak them freely without government censorship. But the values that direct tolerance don’t require me to sit around quietly while people like you state ideas that inherently discriminate against other citizens. Free speech doesn’t mean free from criticism.

            Businesses don’t have the same legal framework as citizens.

            I hope Bryan Hyde watches these forums to see what type of ideological prejudice his statements bring out of the woodwork. There are plenty of benefits to libertarian and conservative ideas but when you dog whistle themes like lynching and try to align the baker’s legal dilemma with Jim Crow and “economic slavery” you open a door to a type of racists and sexist idealogue this country has long fought.

    • DB September 26, 2017 at 3:35 pm

      Umm, John was making a point. It’s called sarcasm.

  • theone September 25, 2017 at 10:10 am

    He was asked to bake a cake not participate in the wedding or Nuptials.
    You delusional conservatives twist thing so far out of joint it’s laughable
    you even participate in life.

    • statusquo September 25, 2017 at 12:06 pm

      By the way, choosing not to stand in support of our nations flag by some NFL employees is also divisive

      • theone September 25, 2017 at 12:23 pm

        May be it is divisive, but it’s legal unlike discrimination.

  • Who September 25, 2017 at 10:30 am

    Jeez, what religion are you????

  • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 10:52 am

    Bryan Hyde once again engages in the laziest of dog whistling (jihad, triggering, economic slavery) while trying to dehumanize those who act inconsistently with his personal beliefs. He tries to side step the civil rights protections of Colorado and supplant them with a subjective right and wrong that aligns with religious beliefs that have discriminated against homosexuals for centuries.

    Hyde’s comparison of this issue to Jim Crow laws is laughable at best and exposes a stance rich in ideology and poor in reason and historical knowledge.

  • Bob September 25, 2017 at 11:08 am

    Why are we wasting time with this non-sense. Every business owner has the right to refuse service. If they choose not to bake a cake then go to the next cake store, problem solved. This shouldn’t be a court issue. I support same sex marriage and if I had a cake shop I wouldn’t even hesitate to make their cake. Some people are just mean and closed minded. To that I say boycott them, not waste our tax dollars going to court.

    • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 1:09 pm

      Every business owner does not have the privilege to deny service in Colorado regarding protected civil rights classes. He has lost cases on that issue so far and knows that law well enough that he no longer bakes any wedding cakes.

      • .... September 25, 2017 at 9:21 pm

        Hey Bob get your facts straight before shooting off your mouth

  • John September 25, 2017 at 11:17 am

    The DRAMA QUEENS can buy and put on their own cake topper, it was the DRAMA QUEENS who are making something that it isn’t out of this NON-ISSUE

    • Gcia September 27, 2017 at 7:27 am

      Exactly! Instead of pulling up their big girl panties and going to a bakery that supports their gay marriage, they have to throw a hissy fit and cram their beliefs down this guys throat. If you don’t support anything that pertains to the LGBT, “qrsutuv” or any other letters they plan to add, then you are intolerant. It has gotten so rediculous, and I’m fed up with the fact that you can’t have an opinion anymore unless it fits their life style. Sorry but your life style is wrong, in my opinion, oh and also in God’s opinion, and I don’t HAVE to agree with it! So like I said before, pull up your big girl panties and move on, everyone doesn’t have to agree with your gay marriage, or anything else you do as an LGBT community.

      • bikeandfish September 27, 2017 at 9:38 am

        Your opinion and chosen religion aren’t the same as Colorado law, which is the primary way we judge conduct in these situations.

        You can do whatever you want as a citizen, including being homophobic and intolerant, that is your right. Once you open a business you are expected to abide by the codes that enforce civil rights laws.

        • Gcia September 27, 2017 at 11:46 pm

          Having a different opinion, doesn’t make someone homophobic. Every business has the right to refuse service, the reason shouldn’t matter, so shut up and move on. I’m sure there is another baker out there willing to bake a gay cake.

          • bikeandfish September 30, 2017 at 7:58 pm

            By law the can’t refuse service based on sex and gender in Colorado. Your opinion is subordinate to law.

            Its not having a different opinion that makes you homophobic its this ” Sorry but your life style is wrong, in my opinion, oh and also in God’s opinion, and I don’t HAVE to agree with it! So like I said before, pull up your big girl panties and move on, everyone doesn’t have to agree with your gay marriage, or anything else you do as an LGBT community.”

            You openly express homophobic ideology and the label fits.

            We have civil rights laws to protect us from such prejudice.

  • NickDanger September 25, 2017 at 11:58 am

    This issue goes much deeper than refusing service to someone over religious beliefs. Businesses – all businesses in the USA – have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. UNLESS the person being refused is a member of a “protected class.” Had Jack Phillips simply refused service and given no reason, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

    Who are the “protected classes?” Under federal anti-discrimination laws, literally anyone who isn’t a healthy, middle-aged, heterosexual white male. Women are a protected class. Homosexuals are a protected class. All races besides “white” are protected classes. Old people, and young people, are protected. The handicapped are protected. So when you look at it like that, it becomes pretty apparent from whom these people are being “protected.”

    That’s the beginning of the conversation we need to be having.

    Speaking as a member of the one unprotected class in the USA, I can tell you that I’m starting to become so irritated by government anti-discrimination laws that you might well be perfectly correct to be afraid of me.

    I’ve a friend back east who owns a tempered glass company. He only hires white males now. He’s afraid to hire anyone else, due to a lawsuit he has experienced over wage discrimination. He will interview anyone, but he will only hire white males. Because he owns the business, he is not required to give a reason for hiring or not hiring anyone, and he doesn’t. He’s doing very, very well.

    Expect more of this. The government must wake up to the fact that by creating so many “protected classes,” they have actually created one class that is being legally marginalized and socially demonized like no other in history. That class happens to be the strongest, smartest, hardest-working class in the country. It’s not going to be long before many more heterosexual white male business owners start hiring exclusively from their own kind and leaving the reason unstated. Why take chances? It’s business.

    White men built this country. We still run it, and there’s a reason for that. A lot of “protected” people are going to find out that reason the hard way in the coming years.

    The sad thing about this case is, it’s so highly inflammatory. There were, undoubtedly, plenty of other bakeries from which these sexual deviants could have gotten their cake. But instead, they decided to wake the sleeping dog. Woof.

    • statusquo September 25, 2017 at 12:07 pm

      Great point Nick!

    • theone September 25, 2017 at 12:15 pm

      Hey nick the #ick, what time of day do you put on your Klan garb?

    • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 12:58 pm

      You don’t understand law and continue to spout white supremacist ideology. What your friend is doing is illegal even if a state lacks evidence to bring charges. Every sex, gender, race, etc is protected from discrimination by federal law, including white males. You have no ground to stand on with your complaints and its just clearly exposes your white supremacy to everyone.

      • NickDanger September 25, 2017 at 3:23 pm

        Standard liberal hyperbole, Bike. If I don’t think it’s just fine for two men to get married under God, I must be burning crosses on black lawns at night.

        I understand the law quite well, though I’m now wondering if you understand it. My friend who only hires white males is absolutely following the letter of the law. He can hire anyone he chooses, or not hire anyone he chooses, and he does not have to give a single reason. What he’s not following is the intent of the law. The intent of all this anti-discrimination nonsense is to force employers to hire more women, racial minorities, and homosexuals, whether or not they are qualified. By doing so, employers are setting themselves up for a major lawsuit if they don’t subsequently give those minorities preferential treatment on wages and promotions.

        It’s a no-brainer to hire all white males. Then you can promote based on merit, and run a business the way a business is supposed to be run.

        In one way, all this misguided legislation is going to benefit the economy in the end. You’ll have your major corporations on one side, beholden to government dictates; hiring all the blacks, women, Mexicans, and homosexuals. And on the other side you’ll have your small-to-medium business owners, hiring the heterosexual white males in order to avoid crippling lawsuits and simply get the job done. The small businesses will rise, and the corporations will sink under the weight of legal fees and incompetence.

        As for white supremacy, that’s a joke. This is a white culture. To me, that means a few things: education, ambition, hard work, an eye to the future, family values, peaceful co-existence, obedience to the law, patriotism, fair play, loyalty, character, consideration of others, and well-directed charity. Anyone, of any race, who adheres to these principles can be anything they want, up to and including President of the United States. And anyone, of any race, who insists on adhering to other principles…well, they get what they deserve for their intentional defiance of the predominant culture.

        If you want to see what homosexual culture is, take in a Gay Pride event in San Francisco – but don’t bring your children unless you want them to learn a thing or twenty about casually-exposed male genitalia and public sex.

        If you want to see what Mexican culture is, look at Mexico, the 3rd-world armpit to our south. If you want to see what black culture is, look at any country in Africa; none are prospering, every single country in Africa is plagued by disease, chaos, and endless violence.

        We do things differently here in predominantly-white America. We do things objectively better, and smarter. That’s why the USA is the most powerful country in the history of the planet.

        The problem with you liberals is, your echo-chamber media doesn’t allow you to realize that you already have equality of opportunity. What you’re really asking for is entitlement. I think we conservatives answered that request pretty clearly in the last election.

        • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 4:11 pm

          What you describe is race and sex based discrimination in the work place and if a state had a brave enough AG they could easily prosecute if an interviewer or former employee came forward. As someone who worked HR in a former life I know more than a little about hiring laws and civil rights lawsuits. The fact that he gets away with it has nothing to do with the its legality but a simple example of how rarely the law is upheld for smaller businesses that fly under the radar.

          What you describe as white culture and its assumed benefits meets the definition of white supremacy. You may not be violent about it but make no mistake that the racism you have constantly spouted on this forum is clear as day.

          And no doubt a certain segment of the conservative population got exactly the leader they wanted in the last election. It was an outcome I predicted because I have listened to folks like you for years. But every 4-8 years there is a turn over in party control, if history holds up, and the demagogue in chief and the alt- right minority that got him there won’t likely survive those historical trends. As a moderate who has voted every party its already clear that conservatives have no love for what he is doing or the radical minority base he brought with him. Here is to hoping the RNC can gets it’s party in order and respect its base before he does much more harm.

          • NickDanger September 25, 2017 at 6:45 pm

            Balderdash and poppycock. Why don’t you try removing the “white” from everything you say and call me what I really am – a SUPREMACIST. Know what that means, Bike? It means that I believe our best course of action as a society and a nation is NOT catering to the layabouts, deviants, and non-hackers, but instead insisting that they up their game if they want a piece of the pie. Aside from all the problems our legislators are creating by putting these people into a special category from which they can sue your pants off if you don’t give them what they want, I don’t give a crap what color or sex a person is, as long as they are up to standard.

            As for homosexuals, I do not support their agenda and never will, because I am a Christian and the Bible is quite clear on that matter. Far as I’m concerned, homosexuality is just a perversion. My guess is that most homosexuals are homosexual because they can’t get laid any other way. Either that or they’re just Satan’s minions.

            If we all followed your advice, Bike, we could certainly reach the lowest common denominator in no time flat. We could become the most average country in the world with no problem whatsoever.

            How about instead of saying, “Yes, women should be allowed to fight on the front line, because…equality,” we say the truth: that women don’t belong on the front line of combat, that women on the front line weaken our military, weaken our country, and force our boys to confront a greater chance of coming home in a body bag than if they didn’t have some weak sister protecting their flank.

            How about instead of saying, “Employers should accept minority employees even if they are not as qualified as white males, because…equality,” we say the truth: that the economy will function better and we will all prosper more if education and employment qualifications are not reduced to account for racial minorities or women; that we’ll all be better off if we demand more from the minorities rather than less from everyone else.

            How about instead of saying, “Jack Phillips can’t uphold his Constitutionally-protected religious beliefs because sexual deviants are oppressed,” we say “Jack Phillips can refuse to build a cake for anyone he wants to refuse to build a cake for because this is a free country.” Maybe the homosexuals in this country should figure out which bakeries will serve them if they want a cake for their freakish “weddings,” rather than being allowed to try to run an upstanding citizen out of business because they’re having a hissy fit.

            You know what happens when you remove the word “social” from “social justice,” Bike? It becomes justice.

            We have a lot of misguided Obama-era legislation to overcome now, thanks to people like you who build your opinions around media fiction rather than reality. But we will overcome it. You should get on-board and come along for the big win, Bike. My father always said, a liberal is just a conservative who hasn’t given the matter enough thought.

        • theone September 25, 2017 at 4:47 pm

          Nickderanerger than anything in the room, you have zero concept of how the law and or The Civil Rights Act apply. Trust me, if your friend is found out he’ll wish he provided equal opportunity. Your concept of law is like the twilight zone. You’re either that stupid or a white racist piece of crap. Try taking that pointy white hood of and let some day light in.
          Hate, bigotry, hypocrisy and probably misogyny are your revealing characteristics. Please grow up and become a member of the human race.

        • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 7:51 pm

          Well I guess we can add homophobic to the list of ideologies you have volunteered.

          If you don’t like the notion of accurately being called a white supremacist than maybe its time to evaluate the ideas you so easily vomit here.

          White Supremacy: noun: the belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society.

          And the idea that you claim you don’t care about skin color is an outright lie. You have voluntarily stated you would move from St George if it becomes more racially diverse.

          We should also add sexist to the mix given your odd statement about women on the front line. My guess is the woman Marine who just graduated from Infantry Officer Course out of Quantico might be able to show you a thing or two about field preparedness and strength.

          Jack Phillips still has a protected right to individually practice his religion. He just can’t discriminate in his business. Two different issues and just another example of how legally illiterate and ahistoric your views remain.

          The good news of the last year is that Trump’s election made folks who share your worldview overly comfortable in public. You are easier to identify and condemn.

          • NickDanger September 25, 2017 at 8:36 pm

            Condemn away, Bike, but you’re the one who’s standing on top of a giant pile of lies.

            I believe the way I feel about what you’ve just said is best summarized by Reggie Jackson, after belting 3 back-to-back home runs on 3 consecutive pitches in Game 6 of the 1977 World Series: “It ain’t bragging if you can do it.”

            So can you do it, Bike? Can you muster your lazy, proud-to-be-uneducated, English-garbling ghetto troops and turn them into taxpayers? Can you convince enough of your women to commit to testosterone treatments so that they become (almost) the physical equals of men instead of just pretending that they are? Can you pull your homosexuals away from their disgusting public orgies long enough to say something besides “Gay Pride!!” Can you turn the lies into the truth?

            No, you can’t. White men built your world. White men invented nearly everything in it, and continue to do so. White men still own nearly everything that matters. White men make the laws, however misguided by voter demographics they may be. You’re absolutely right to try to legislate us into marginalization – IF you want to transform the USA from the undisputed leader of the free world into a second-rate economic non-factor. We’re not bragging. This is what we did. This is who we are.

            What are you? Lucky to be here, that’s what. And how do you want to repay your benevolent benefactors? By dragging the entire country down into a cesspool of mediocrity and filth.

            I speak only the truth, Bike. And you, sir, speak in pure “Liberal Buzzword” – racist, homophobic, sexist, of course I am all of these things. Because there is no benefit whatsoever to the United States of America to find the lowest common denominator and move there.

            Pick up your game, Bike, and tell your troops to do likewise. It’s a long way to the top, and the Trump Train isn’t slowing down to pick up stragglers. God Bless President Trump!

    • Gcia September 27, 2017 at 7:30 am


  • DRT September 25, 2017 at 12:50 pm

    Right or Wrong? What is right for one person is wrong for the next one. The problem is that the line between right and wrong has been obliterated.

    “When his critics smugly claim that Phillips is duty-bound to create cakes for same-sex couples because he is engaged in commerce, they are relying on legalistic impulses rather than right and wrong.”

    I’m glad that I never owned a business. While I’m relatively liberal as in “you go do what you want with whom you want, (unless it’s a minor,) and I’m not going to give a darn. By the same token, I will do what I want, and unless it is illegal, it’s none of your fricking business”
    As I said, I’m glad I was never a business man. Because the first time that someone really tried to FORCE me to do something that I don’t believe in, it most likely would the the last time they were physically able to do anything.
    So go marry your dog, I don’t care. I really don’t. But do NOT expect me to go buy a rawhide for you to chew on, and a steak to give to the dog.
    In other words, you do your thing, I’ll do mine, and LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE!

    • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 1:01 pm

      Except the baker did break the law, hence the customers success in court battles so far. The baker clearly violated Colorado’s civil rights laws that govern businesses. The same tenets that ended racial discrimination at lunch counters will end this discrimination by businesses against homosexuals.

      • DRT September 25, 2017 at 3:52 pm

        So you don’t like what I wrote, and I don’t like what you wrote. I think we’d be best to just agree to disagree on this one.

        • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 4:19 pm

          Except opinion doesn’t matter as right now, until the SCOTUS rules, the law sides with the customers and Colorado’s penalty against the baker. He broke the law and suffered the consequences. That is fact.

          Given the fact that a majority of the youngest generations support same sex marriage and LGBTQi+ rights its my guess that the type of discrimination you support by businesses will become illegal in every state in my lifetime. The arch of American history has always headed that way even if it takes a while.

          • bikeandfish September 25, 2017 at 4:20 pm

            Hehe, *arc, not arch

  • Kyle L. September 25, 2017 at 4:55 pm

    What happened to the “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” signs? They never offended me. I figure if someone doesn’t want to do business with me I will go somewhere else. No big deal.

  • ladybugavenger September 25, 2017 at 6:07 pm

    Well, well,well….let’s get back to some football. Back to the times when I could watch a game, eat some chips and salsa, drink a beer and forget about politics.

    • dodgers September 26, 2017 at 5:55 am

      Unfortunately, it could be a long time until football is just football, without the misdirected protests. Till then, no NFL for me.

  • .... September 25, 2017 at 9:23 pm

    The only logical comment made on this subject is ladybugs comment

    • Gcia September 28, 2017 at 12:07 am

      That might be true if all the jackasses weren’t busy protesting stupid crap that doesn’t even affect them lol

  • jaybird September 25, 2017 at 9:41 pm

    People around St George and surrounds try to appear so offended by anything gay, transgender or culturally diverse, their white turns pale when such confronts them. Yet they smile in silent approval while polygamy walks right past with or without diassaproval, knowing pedophilia permeates the culture. Disgusting hypocracy going on in the state with the highest pornography viewers than any other state. Oh, self righteousness can be so rewarding when its a mask for perversion.

  • dodgers September 26, 2017 at 5:51 am

    I believe SCOTUS will rule in favor of the baker. The homosexual couple can still get their cake elsewhere, as can those celebrating a bachelor party, Halloween or witchcraft.

  • DB September 26, 2017 at 3:40 pm

    My thought, make the dang cake. You’re just baking a cake, not endorsing their marriage. By refusing to furnish the cake, you have told the world that you have an agenda of some sort, which perhaps you have.

    • Gcia September 28, 2017 at 12:15 am

      Why does he have to have some sort of agenda just because he doesn’t want to bake a gay cake? Also, when he said no, why couldn’t the couple just go somewhere else and get there gay cake made? Sounds to me like they are the ones with the agenda, to force their gay lifestyle down everyone’s throats. If you want to be gay, be gay and leave the rest of us alone.

  • Gcia September 28, 2017 at 12:18 am

    Nickdanger speaks alot of truth!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.