Supremes allow law exempting Christians from homosexual promotion


Ever since five liberal justices on the U.S. Supreme Court created same-sex “marriage” – with two arguably having breached ethics rules by advocating for same-sex “marriage” while the case was pending – homosexual activists have been using the legal system to punish defenders of traditional marriage

hey’ve targeted bakers for refusing to promote same-sex weddings – one incendiary member of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission even compared a cake artist to Nazis and slave owners.

They’ve attacked county clerks for the same reason. And photographers. And videographers. And calligraphers. And venue owners. And many more people.

But now there’s indication that the Supreme Court may be drawing a line.

The high court has refused to intervene in a case regarding a Missouri state law that protects from retaliation or punishment of people who believe marriage is the union of one man and one woman, that gender is determined at birth and that sex is reserved for married couples.

“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight principles to help Americans who hold conservative moral values counter attacks on freedoms of religion, speech and conscience by homosexual activists

The court’s decision not to intervene left standing a ruling from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that said the complainants didn’t have standing, meaning they didn’t suffer a specific injury.

The complaint was brought against the state’s Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, signed into law in April 2016.

A federal district court blocked the law’s implementation, but the 5th Circuit allowed it to take effect, and now the Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene leaves the law in place.

The law “protects citizens, public servants, businesses, and religious institutions from government reprisal for operating publicly according to their belief that marriage is reserved for one man and one woman, that sexual activity is intended only for married couples, and that one’s biological sex cannot change.”

It overrules municipal “fairness” ordinances that demand religious business owners promote homosexuality in violation of their faith.

Had such a law been enacted in Oregon, state officials would have been unable to fine the bakery Sweet Cakes by Melissa $135,000 for refusing to promote same-sex marriage.

The fine effectively was a death penalty for the bakery, forcing it to go out of business.

The Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene in the Missouri case could signal how it will rule in the case brought by Jack Phillips’ Masterpiece Cakeshop, which was fined by Colorado for declining to provide a same-sex wedding cake.

“Good laws like Mississippi’s protect freedom and harm no one,” said Kevin Theriot, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom.

The group was part of the team defending Mississippi’s law.

“The 5th Circuit was right to find that those opposing this law haven’t been harmed and, therefore, can’t try to take it down. Because of that, we are pleased that the Supreme Court declined to take up these baseless challenges, which misrepresented the law’s sole purpose of ensuring that Mississippians don’t live in fear of losing their careers or their businesses simply for affirming marriage as a husband-wife union,” he said.

Pastor Dukes Books now published on Amazon and Kendle Proceeds  to be used to pioneer new work in Yerington NV.Sister Carol Dukes Book now published on Amazon