By Deacon Mike Manno
(The Wanderer) – In early 2015 Melissa and Aaron Klein, and
their bakery, Sweet Cakes by Melissa, were found guilty by an Oregon court of
discrimination against a same-sex couple for refusing to make a wedding cake
for their same-sex wedding. A long, sad story followed the Kleins and their
case.
The Kleins had refused
the business because of their Christian belief that same-sex marriages are
against God’s law.
Facing a fine of
$135,000, mandatory attendance at a “re-education” program, a gag order
prohibiting them from speaking about their case, being hounded by the
“tolerant” left as bigots and bullies, the Kleins were forced out of business.
Unable to work in Oregon, they moved themselves and their children to Montana
where Aaron got a job and Melissa made cupcakes from home and sold them online.
But, while they were
losing everything around them, the Kleins, with the help of lawyers from First
Liberty Institute, appealed their conviction and fine. Their case eventually
wound up in front of the Oregon appellate courts, where they lost again.
Finally they appealed to the United States Supreme Court which had just heard
and ruled on arguments in the Colorado case of Jack Phillips, where he was
facing the same disciplinary action by his state against himself and his
business, Masterpiece Cakeshop.
In that case the court found that the state agencies investigating had acted
with animus against Mr. Phillips and his religious beliefs. In a highly
anticipated decision, the court ruled in Mr. Phillips’ favor and vacated the
state’s actions against him, which also included a required stint in a
“re-education” program for Jack and all of his employees. As part of the
decision, the court warned that when dealing with religious beliefs, courts and
state agencies need to be careful to respect those religious rights and not to
do anything that would infringe on an individual’s right of religious
expression guaranteed by the First Amendment.
With the Masterpiece
Cakeshop as background, the justices in Washington did not hear the Kleins’
case, but simply remanded the case back to the Oregon courts to determine if
there was religious animus involved that violated the Kleins’ religious
freedoms, and to reconsider the case in light of that finding and of the ruling
in Masterpiece.
The Oregon court then
found that the state agency that had originally investigated the Kleins did not
do so in a neutral fashion and did act with religious animus against them.
Then, instead of dismissing the case in light of its findings, the court simply
referred the matter back to the investigating agency.
The agency, which had
acted with religious animus, was to re-examine the case including the amount of
the fine, which the state was still holding.
Additionally, the
investigative agency is still pursuing action against the Kleins. One of the
attorneys representing the Kleins, First Liberty’s senior counsel Stephanie
Taub, told my radio audience that they are now appealing the referral to the
agency to the State Supreme Court and will follow up with another appeal to the
United States Supreme Court, if necessary.
And so that is where
the matter sits as of today. “It’s been a long journey for Aaron and Melissa,
they deserved justice, and to have had a fair trial, and because they weren’t
treated fairly this case should be over,” attorney Taub opined. She is right,
this case should have ended years ago and the Kleins allowed to put their lives
back together again.
Unfortunately, we see
a lot of this nowadays. Members of the Progressive Party have shown themselves
completely unable to recognize or empathize with those who have religious
convictions that long predate the socialist policies the Progressivists hold.
And while they spouted “tolerance” for themselves, they will not give the same
benefit to others with whom they disagree.
The forces of Hell at
work.
Special Counsel John
Durham
I’m writing this just
after the Super Bowl. This week has seen a lot of news; there are truckers
demonstrating in Canada (and soon, perhaps, in the United States); Russia is
ready to start a new European war; crime is running roughshod over our cities,
and little children, who are unlikely to succumb to the coronavirus, are still
masked by power-wielding school boards and union officials.
But in all this news
there is one story that is not being reported, except on a few conservative
outlets. Like Big Media’s boycott of the Hunter Biden story, they are
boycotting Special Counsel John Durham’s 13-page motion which begins to expose
the criminal conspiracy to “frame” Donald Trump for all things Russian.
Durham’s motion, “To
Inquire Into Potential Conflict of Interest,” is an attempt to focus on the
conflicts of interest that Michael Sussmann and his attorneys may have with
other attorneys involved in any way with the investigation. Sussmann was the
attorney for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and was indicted for
lying about his continued involvement with the campaign when he tried to
present himself as just a good citizen with information (dirt) on Donald Trump.
Without getting into
the weeds, the motion contains a four and one-half page section, Factual
Background, which outlines the genesis of a conspiracy, apparently orchestrated
by the Clinton Campaign, to ensnare Donald Trump in the fake Russian
conspiracy.
The outline sets out a
tangled web of characters who worked purportedly for the Clinton Campaign who
used a tech company to spy — yes spy — on Mr. Trump while a candidate, at his
residence, and even at the White House. The filing suggests that tech firms,
beginning as early as July of 2016, “worked with the defendant, a U.S.
investigative firm retained by Law Firm-1 on behalf of the Clinton Campaign,
numerous cyber researchers, and employees at multiple Internet companies to
assemble the purported data and white papers. . . .
“Tech Executive-1
tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and
‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1
indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to
individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton Campaign.”
Most disturbing, of
course, is how this enterprise was able to tap the computers in the White
House. But then remember, this all started during the Obama administration.
It sounds to me like chickens coming home to roost. Indictments will follow.
Let’s see how long it takes for Big Media to notice, and apologize for running
interference for the Democrats.
(You can contact Mike
at DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on
Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)
No comments:
Post a Comment