We can all acknowledge that the Left does not hide its agenda or its strategy. It is very clear, if you are watching. The most recent attack from the Left requires that every man, woman, and child, no matter their station in life, agree with their radical sexual agenda.

As we’ve noted in previous messages, this most recent attack is coming to our city councils and to our state capitol in the form of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) nondiscrimination ordinances and laws. Over the next several weeks, I will break down the impact these laws can and do have on your profession, your child’s school, your speech, your church, and many other facets of your daily life.

The first area I will be addressing is the business arena. These laws don’t just affect business owners, though. They affect each and every one of us. These concerns are having impacts on real people’s lives people’s lives even as you read this.

There are three different ways that SOGIs impact the business arena:

SOGIs come between business owners and their customers

SOGIs are being used as a sword against business who believe in Biblical sexuality. Business owners across the country are being targeted for living out their faith in the way they conduct their business.

Here are just a few examples:

Each one of these business owners had no problem serving the individuals involved – they simply could not participate in the particular event or the specific service requested. These owners happily referred them to other businesses. Yet, the Left could not let them be. And in many of these instances these individuals are being sued daily until they recant.

SOGIs force contractors out of the public square

Many states and cities have gone so far as to pass laws that don’t allow government contracts with businesses they believe are associated with or promote a biblical view of sexuality. The prime example of this is when San Antonio tried to ban Chick-fil-A from its airport.

This is not just happening in other states – it’s happening in Kansas too. We saw a similar effort in Kansas at KU over the summer as some tried to force KU to ban Chick-fil-A from the campus. Governor Kelly made sure to include this sort of language in the first executive order she signed – requiring that all government contractors agree with her ideology.

These sorts of provisions are in many of the city ordinances that are being passed as well. These provisions violate the religious freedom of contractors by saying just because the business owner, or someone associated with the business, holds a certain worldview – they are excluded from the public square.

SOGIs requires YOU – the consumer – to share intimate spaces with members of the opposite sex

One way that SOGIs effect every person that enters a business, or a government building, is that SOGI’s require that bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers be open to anyone regardless . These laws generally require that places of public accommodations (most businesses) with more than a certain number of employees (normally 10 or more though it varies) must open up their restrooms, locker rooms, and other dressing rooms to everyone. This means that men who claim to be women can legally enter any dressing room alongside women or children.

These are just a few of the many examples of how the Left is seeking to force businesses to comply with and carry out their sexual agenda. As we’ve discussed before several City Councils in Johnson County have been quietly passing SOGI ordinance in recent months.

But it’s not just Johnson County that is being targeted. Legislators across the state are already being pushed to cave in their protections of religious freedom, women, girls, and everyone who engages in the public square. It is vital that we continue to let legislators know that it is important that they protect our God given freedoms. If you would like to contact your legislator, you can find their contact information here (just enter your zip code and/or address to see their contact information).

For the freedom of all Kansans,

Brittany Jones, Esq.
Director of Advocacy

Barronelle Stutzman, great grandmother and Washington State florist, was prosecuted and could lose everything, simply for declining to create custom flower arrangements for a same-sex wedding. A similar law is about to be voted on in Helena, and your action is needed.

Montana is neighborly and welcoming – a great place to raise a family and to live out your faith.

But now, some legislators are pushing a bill that would punish people for their ideas and beliefs. This is a battle that needs the attention of all Montanans. A vote is possible on Friday, so your action is needed today!

The bill (House Bill 465) is known as a SOGI law because it offers special protections for “sexual orientation and gender identity” classes.

Do you remember Jack Phillips? He is the Colorado baker who recently won a Supreme Court case, after being prosecuted under a SOGI law for declining to bake a cake celebrating a same-sex wedding.

Do you remember Barronelle Stutzman? She is the florist in Washington State (pictured above) who is also being prosecuted under SOGI laws for declining to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding. She, like Jack, is at grave risk of losing her home and business from fines and legal costs.

Over and over again, SOGI laws have been the leading tool used by the Left to attack religious freedom. And the gender identity component puts the privacy and safety of women and girls at risk by opening women’s bathrooms, showers, dressing rooms and other public accommodations to men.

This bill will be heard by the House Judiciary Committee on Friday morning. You can send a message to each of the committee members – urging them to vote NO – with just a click on our Action Center.

Please make your voice heard for freedom! Thanks for taking action and spreading the word!

The Family Policy Alliance Team

In association with our state ally, Montana Family Foundation

Jack Phillips isn’t running for any election this year, but he sure has a lot riding on the outcome of one of the most closely watched races in this 2018 midterm election.

You know Jack as the family man and bakery owner from Colorado who was punished by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for declining to create custom cakes that would violate his sincere Christian faith.

Jack Phillips

Thankfully, just this June, the U.S. Supreme Court decisively ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had violated Jack’s rights—with even liberal justices on the Court ruling in Jack’s favor in the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision. This hasn’t stopped the Commission from going after Jack again—this time for declining to create a cake celebrating a person’s “gender transition.”

Learn more about Jack.

While Jack is back in court defending his faith, Colorado voters have a decision to make that will impact Jack, other people of faith in Colorado, and ultimately the entire country. The decision in the Colorado Governor’s race is one of the key races in the country this November.

Jared Polis

One of the candidates running for Colorado Governor is Jared Polis, an LGBT activist and liberal congressman who supports the Commission’s actions in targeting Jack for his faith. In fact, Polis has made supporting the Commission one of his key election platforms. And worse yet, as governor, Polis would have the power to appoint even more radical members to the Commission.

This means that things could get even worse for Jack and other people of faith in Colorado. 

The problem is—most voters in Colorado don’t know that Polis supports how the Commission targeted Jack, or that other states have already looked at the Colorado Commission as an example in how to target their own people of faith!

We need your help today!

We are working to reach as many voters as possible with this video, revealing how Polis will make things worse for Jack and other people of faith.

https://youtu.be/lPLWyiYZnC8

Will you stand with Jack and help spread the word? Every $20 reaches 500 key voters in Colorado!

Standing with Jack,

Paul Weber,
President & CEO

P.S. Jared Polis is ahead in the polls right now…but only by 7 points! This means that people of faith in Colorado can make the difference in this election! Please give to make sure as many voters as possible in Colorado know to Stand With Jack this election!

DONATE

Paid for by Family Policy Alliance Independent Expenditure Committee.
Not authorized by any candidate.

 

Dear Friends,

On Monday religious believers’ rights were confirmed in a big way by the Supreme Court in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Seven out of the nine justices on the Court vindicated Christian cake baker, Jack Phillips’, right to live out his faith in his business.  The Court was tasked with deciding whether Colorado could force a business owner to make a product and support a message that he disagreed with based upon his religious belief. The Court based their ruling on the fact that the specific cake baker in question did not get a fair hearing because of the hostility the government showed to his religious beliefs throughout the proceedings.

The ruling yesterday is very good news. The ability of all Americans to live out their religious beliefs was strongly reinforced. Regarding Jack, the Court ruled that the government was wrong to punish him for living consistently with his sincerely held religious beliefs. Nationally, the decision recognized the inherent tension between religious beliefs and the sexual revolution, legitimizing the concerns of religious believers across the country about the growing hostility against any belief concerning God’s design for marriage.

There are several positive things to take away from the decision, and a few hints about challenges that remain.

The Decision

The Court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission unconstitutionally violated the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution because it showed clear hostility towards Jack’s religious beliefs and applied state law unfairly. The Court noted that the Commission showed their hostility against religion in two ways. Their hostility was shown in their abusive and dismissive language when discussing Jack’s beliefs. Secondly, the Commission showed hostility by applying Colorado anti-discrimination law differently in different cases based upon whether it believed the claim in question was valid.

Three Takeaways

First, in his majority opinion, Justice Kennedy rebuked the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that adjudicated Jack’s case for comparing his religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust, calling such rhetoric “clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.” Sadly, this sort of rhetoric is regularly used to characterize advocates of religious freedom.  This language has been used to describe defenders of religious freedom in Idaho repeatedly over the last several years. We reject these repulsive comparisons and we are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has our back.  In Jack’s case, the court ruled that “religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and, in some instances, protected forms of expression.”

Second, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of business owners to bring their religion with them to work. Justice Kennedy rejected the Commissions’ view “that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain”.

Third, Justice Kennedy reminded us that the government doesn’t get to protect only the conscience rights it agrees with. His opinion criticizes the different treatment Jack received before the Commission compared to treatment of other bakers who declined to create cakes with messages to which they objected, including those with anti-gay marriage messages. In a concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch exposed this inconsistency, stating, “the Commission allowed three other bakers to refuse a customer’s request that would have required them to violate their secular commitments. Yet it denied the same accommodation to Mr. Phillips [Jack] when he refused a customer’s request that would have required him to violate his religious beliefs.”

What Now?

The Supreme Court was never meant to be the determiner of all issues of conflict. Issues where reasonable people disagree were intended to be worked out in the legislative branches, particularly in the state legislatures. The Court’s decision in Masterpiece just cements the need for the state legislatures to do their job and legislate. The Idaho legislature has taken many steps to preserve the fundamental right to religious freedom and conscience, like enacting a RFRA in 2000.

Other avenues that the Idaho legislators could take in the coming legislative session to further protect religious believers is to pass an Adoption Protection Act like was just passed by Kansas and Oklahoma or a Government Nondiscrimination Act.

We must also take seriously the threat to our freedoms posed by so-called “anti-discrimination” ordinances and unelected, bureaucratic entities like Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission. We must continually fight against measures like “add the words” in our state so that we don’t find ourselves in a situation like Colorado where a run away commission is allowed to attack religious believers with antidiscrimination statutes.

Rest assured, Family Policy Alliance of Idaho will not grow weary in our defense of your right to live and work in line with your faith. It is important that you talk with those in your sphere of influence and explain to them the importance of the Supreme Court’s ruling and its effect on their lives. Encourage your legislators to pass bills that will strengthen your religious freedom. Continue to support Family Policy of Idaho in our ongoing fight to ensure that all people have the right to do business in Idaho and have the freedom to believe.

Sincerely,

Brittany Jones
Interim Policy Director of Family Policy of Idaho

Dear Friends:

The most anticipated U.S. Supreme Court decision of the year was released on Monday. The case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (CCRC) involved Jack Phillips, a faithful Christian, who was charged with violating Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act for politely declining to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The Court’s answer to the legal question at the heart of the case—whether Colorado could force a business owner to make a product expressing a message that violated the business owner’s religious beliefs—might have been the most significant opinion in a generation. Instead, in a 7-2 opinion, the Court punted on that fundamental question and decided the case on other grounds—that, Jack, the cake baker in question, did not get a fair hearing before the CCRC.

While this result isn’t the sweeping affirmation of a business owner’s right to religious freedom we hoped for, it is still very good news. Jack won the case and the Court opined that the government was wrong to punish him for living consistent with his sincerely held religious beliefs.

There are several positive things to take away from the decision, and a few hints about challenges that remain.

The Decision

The Court held that the CCRC unconstitutionally violated Jack’s constitutional right to freely exercise his beliefs when they (1) demonstrated clear hostility to Jack’s religious beliefs and (2) applied state law unfairly. The Court noted that the CCRC was openly hostile toward religion in their abusive and dismissive language when discussing Jack’s beliefs. Further, they applied Colorado’s anti-discrimination law differently in different cases, using their own subjective opinion to determine whether the claim in question was valid.

 The Takeaways

 First, in his majority opinion, Justice Kennedy rebuked the CCRC that adjudicated Jack’s case for comparing his religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust, calling such rhetoric “clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.” Sadly, this sort of rhetoric is regularly used to characterize advocates of religious freedom. We reject these repulsive comparisons and we are extremely pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court has our back. In Jack’s case, the court ruled that “religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.”

Second, the Court affirmed the right of business owners to bring their religion with them to work. Justice Kennedy included the CCRC view “that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain” among the elements of a “clear and impermissible hostility” towards Jack’s faith.

Third, Justice Kennedy reminded us that the government doesn’t get to protect only the conscience rights it agrees with. His opinion directly criticized the different treatment Jack received before the CCRC when compared to the treatment of other bakers who declined to create cakes with messages to which they objected, including cakes with anti-gay marriage messages. In a concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch exposed this inconsistency, stating, “the Commission allowed three other bakers to refuse a customer’s request that would have required them to violate their secular commitments. Yet it denied the same accommodation to Mr. Phillips [Jack] when he refused a customer’s request that would have required him to violate his religious beliefs.

Where do we go from here?

 Although this case represents a victory for Jack and people of all faiths, the Court left significant questions unanswered. In the majority opinion, Justice Kennedy suggested that future challenges are not only likely, but that the outcome of such cases could very well be different. Consequently, we believe this case has set the table for state’s to take action and enact clear religious freedom protections for all their citizens.

 Moving forward, New Mexico must take the necessary steps to preserve our fundamental right to religious freedom and conscience. We must also take seriously the threat to our freedoms posed by so-called “anti-discrimination” ordinances; by unelected, bureaucratic entities like Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission; and by the courts.

Let’s not forget what happened locally in 2006 when the New Mexico Supreme Court unanimously ruled against Christian photographer, Elaine Huguenin, who respectfully turned down a request to photograph a same-sex wedding. In a concurring opinion, former-Justice Richard Bosson acknowledged that the New Mexico Supreme Court was compelling Elaine and her husband to “compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.” Even so, Justice Bosson infamously went on to state that this was the “price of citizenship” in New Mexico.

Thankfully, on Monday, 7 of the 9 U.S. Supreme Court Justices disagreed.

Rest assured, Family Policy Alliance of New Mexico will not grow weary in our defense of your right to live and work in accordance with your faith. However, to be successful, we need you to PRAY, VOTE, SPEAK UP, and GIVE.

  1. We need you to PRAY for our ministry and that God will raise up godly men and women to lead our state.
  2. We need you to VOTE this November for pro-religious freedom candidates who will help us strengthen the law to protect people of all faiths, including business owners like Jack and Elaine.
  3. We need you to SPEAK UP and voice your support for religious freedom legislation when it comes before the New Mexico Legislature.
  4. And we need you to GIVE to help support our efforts to mobilize people of faith, train leaders, and represent your values in Santa Fe and throughout the state. So, if you are not already supporting us financially, can we count on you to send a gift today? If so, please click here and help us make a difference in New Mexico.

Thank you for your continued prayers and support!

Sincerely,

Vince Torres
President and Executive Director

Dear Friends,

The most anticipated Supreme Court decision of the year was released on Monday. The case of Masterpiece Cakeshop involved Jack Phillips, a faithful Christian, who was charged with violating Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act for politely declining to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. There’s good news and also a call to action associated with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Here’s the good news: Jack Phillips was vindicated with a 7-2 decision that was very critical of the Colorado Commission’s hostility towards people of faith. This is, no doubt, a praise!

Quite simply, this means that a Christian’s ability to live out their faith at work, in school, or in the public sphere is little more secure today than it was prior to the ruling.  What about our state? It is imperative for the 2019 legislative session and the governor to uphold and strengthen our First Amendment rights. Historically, the Courts have shown a refusal to defend the Constitution, and it is time for courageous political leadership!

Here are some major, positive takeaways from the decision as well as our path forward:

First, in his majority opinion, Justice Kennedy rebuked the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that adjudicated Jack’s case for comparing his religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust, calling such rhetoric “clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.” Thankfully, this decision should strike a blow to overt bigotry against Christians: “religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.”

Second, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of business owners to bring their religion with them to work. Justice Kennedy included the Commissions’ view “that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain” among the elements of a “clear and impermissible hostility” towards Jack’s faith.

Third, Justice Kennedy reminded us that the government doesn’t get to protect only the conscience rights it agrees with. His opinion criticizes the different treatment Jack received before the Commission compared to treatment of other bakers who declined to create cakes with messages to which they objected, including those with anti-gay marriage messages. In a concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch exposed this inconsistency, stating, “the Commission allowed three other bakers to refuse a customer’s request that would have required them to violate their secular commitments. Yet it denied the same accommodation to Mr. Phillips [Jack] when he refused a customer’s request that would have required him to violate his religious beliefs.”

So What Now?

It is very easy to look at the 7-2 win, throw your hands up in celebration, and believe this is a lasting victory. That is, unfortunately not true.

Instead, this ruling underscores the importance of the coming elections, as the Court proved that decisions of this magnitude still lie in the hands of elected officials. Will North Dakota’s politicians continue to defend your First Amendment rights? Will courageous state leaders pick up this punt from the Supreme Court, take the ball, and run toward a victory for this critical principle that was the catalyst for our nation’s founding?  We certainly hope so and are standing ready to help.

Can we count on you to help us get this message out? Your generous contribution of $100, $250, or more will help us elect candidates around the state who recognize that religious freedom is an inalienable right (not simply a legal right) and will fight for it .

We are thankful for God’s mercy in sparing us from what could have been a disastrous ruling, for granting affirmation for Jack, and for other positive elements in this decision. Nevertheless, now is the time to re-double our efforts on the real battlefield: the political landscape, where this fight will ultimately be decided.

Blessings,

Mark Jorritsma
President And Executive Director

 

Dear Friends,

The most anticipated Supreme Court decision of the year was released on Monday. The case of Masterpiece Cakeshop involved Jack Phillips, a faithful Christian, who was charged with violating Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act for politely declining to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The Court’s answer to the legal question at the heart of the case—whether Colorado could force a business owner to make a product and support a message that he disagreed with based upon his religious beliefs—might have been the most significant opinion in a generation. Instead, in a 7-2 opinion, the Supreme Court punted on that fundamental question and decided the case on other grounds: that the specific cake baker in question did not get a fair hearing.

While this result isn’t the sweeping affirmation of a business owner’s right to religious freedom we hoped for, it is still very good news. Jack won the case and the Court opined that the government was wrong to punish him for living consistent with his sincerely held religious beliefs.

There are several positive things to take away from the decision, and a few hints about challenges that remain.

The Decision

The Court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission unconstitutionally violated Jack’s constitutional right to freely exercise his beliefs because the Commission showed clear hostility to Jack’s religious beliefs and applied state law unfairly. The Court noted that the Commission showed their hostility against religion in their abusive and dismissive language when discussing Jack’s beliefs and by applying Colorado anti-discrimination law differently in different cases based upon whether its own subjective opinion about whether the claim in question was valid.

Three Takeaways

First, in his majority opinion, Justice Kennedy rebuked the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that adjudicated Jack’s case for comparing his religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust, calling such rhetoric “clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.” Sadly, this sort of rhetoric is regularly used to characterize advocates of religious freedom. For example, during our fight for the Adoption Protection Act, several members of the Kansas legislature described us in the same manner. We reject these repulsive comparisons and we are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has our back.  In Jack’s case, the Court ruled that “religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.”

Second, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of business owners to bring their religion with them to work. Justice Kennedy included the Commission’s view “that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain” among the elements of a “clear and impermissible hostility” towards Jack’s faith.

Third, Justice Kennedy reminded us that the government doesn’t get to protect only the conscience rights it agrees with. His opinion criticizes the different treatment Jack received before the Commission compared to treatment of other bakers who declined to create cakes with messages to which they objected, including those with anti-gay marriage messages. In a concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch exposed this inconsistency, stating, “the Commission allowed three other bakers to refuse a customer’s request that would have required them to violate their secular commitments. Yet it denied the same accommodation to Mr. Phillips [Jack] when he refused a customer’s request that would have required him to violate his religious beliefs.”

What Now?

Kansas has taken many steps to preserve the fundamental right to religious freedom and conscience, like RFRA, the Campus Religious Freedom Act, and the Adoption Protection Act. Preserving these statutes against the constant pressure to rescind them is paramount.

We must also take seriously the threat to our freedoms posed by so-called “anti-discrimination” ordinances and unelected, bureaucratic entities like Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission. Recently, Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas, added sexual orientation and gender identity to their “nondiscrimination” ordinances, a severe threat to the basic human rights of Kansas citizens.

Rest assured, Family Policy Alliance of Kansas will not grow weary in our defense of your right to live and work in line with your faith. We are currently gearing up for the 2018 elections and supporting candidates who will join us in that fight at the legislature. Will you equip us to get them elected by making a donation to Family Policy Alliance of Kansas today?

Sincerely,

Eric Teetsel
President & Executive Director

 

By Stephanie Curry, Esq., policy manager for Family Policy Alliance®

The long awaited Supreme Court opinion in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case was handed down yesterday: 7-2 in favor of Jack Phillips and his business, Masterpiece Cakeshop. Family Policy Alliance congratulates Jack Phillips and his legal team with our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom on their long-awaited victory!

Jack is the Colorado cake artist who declined to create a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding ceremony in 2012. Jack, a devout Christian, treats his employees with faithful intentionality. He closes on Sundays, pays his employees a livable wage, and even loans them money when needed. He puts the same thoughtful intentionality into his business, meeting personally with couples and often attending the weddings and receptions for which he makes custom cakes. In line with his faith, he declines to design baked goods with Halloween themes, nudity, alcohol or for same-sex weddings.

As you’ve heard, Craig and David Mullins sued Jack for declining to make them a same-sex wedding cake. The Mullins sued under Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Law, which allows “sexual orientation” to be a protected class, like race or religion. Not only does this law invent a new protected class with inadequate protections for religious freedom, but the Colorado Civil Rights Commission has also been using its authority under the law to target and discriminate against people of faith. The very decision-makers who are supposed to identify and prevent discrimination, are themselves engaged in blatant and hostile discrimination against Jack Phillips and his religious beliefs.

In their opinion yesterday, the Supreme Court harshly admonished the Colorado Civil Rights Commission and the Colorado Court of Appeals for their unconstitutional and discriminatory treatment of Jack’s religious beliefs. In the end, a case that, according to the media and groups like the ACLU, was about discrimination against the LGBTQ community was actually about discrimination against people of faith.

The Court was crystal clear that discrimination against religious beliefs would not be tolerated when performed by the government, especially when the government has a constitutional duty to apply its laws neutrally towards everyone.

There are still many lessons to be gleaned from the Masterpiece Cakeshop opinion, but the most important is that Jack should not have had to go to Court to defend his constitutional right to religious freedom in the first place. The Colorado Legislature should have reined in the Commission’s power and enacted strong laws to protect religious freedom for all its citizens, including Jack.

This means it is critical for the family of believers to work together to elect legislators who will stand strong for religious freedom in every state. It is the responsibility of our elected leaders to pass good laws clarifying that people of faith are welcome in every state, including business owners like Jack. As Justice Gorsuch eloquently stated in his concurrence, “The Constitution protects not just popular religious exercises from the condemnation of civil authorities. It protects them all.”

No doubt you heard about the travesty of justice that happened to Jack Phillips, a fellow Coloradan and small business owner who is pictured above.  The state of Colorado punished him for declining to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, and of course his case is pending right now in the U.S. Supreme Court.

But where did that case even come from?  It was an enforcement action by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, an unelected body that badly needs reforming.

Radical, agenda-driven leftists have used the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to penalize Christian business owners. Even Justice Kennedy, author of the decision to legalize gay marriage nationally, pointed out that the Commission has gone too far in their religious bigotry.

The Colorado Senate, in a bi-partisan and unanimous vote, approved changes to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that provided greater accountability, fairness, and equality for all Coloradans. But the Speaker of the House, Denver Democrat Crisanta Duran, is doing all she can to protect the unjust and unfair status quo.

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission should serve all Coloradans, and not be a tool to drive a particular leftist agenda that harms people of faith.

Please contact your State Senator and Representative and ask them to support the senate amendments to safeguard your freedoms.  It only takes a few moments on our Action Center.

The last day of the Legislature is Wednesday, so please take action right away, and then pass this along to others.  Thank you for making your voice heard!

The Family Policy Alliance Team

Photo Courtesy of Alliance Defending Freedom.

Could you lose everything simply for standing up for your faith?

In today’s America, yes you could. That’s why concerned Christians are eagerly watching the Masterpiece Cakeshop Supreme Court case to determine how the Supreme Court will treat Jack Phillips, a Christian baker who is under attack for his conviction to not use his God-given talents to assist in a God-defying gay marriage.

A win would be a tremendous blessing for Jack, artists like him everywhere, and for Christians hoping the Supreme Court upholds rights of conscience. We are thankful for Jack, and for the faithful attorneys who defend him.

But, here’s the sad truth: a win for Jack will ultimately do little to reverse what is happening in our culture.

Consider a recent PEW poll that says only 32% of Americans believe in God’s design of marriage- one man and one woman. Among Millennials, support for gay marriage has reached 75%. Just go into any church youth group, and you will be stunned at the responses you get when you ask the kids about their views on homosexuality and transgenderism.

So how do we have hope in these times?

First, we fix our eyes on the Lord who calls us to be faithful, promises a reward for that faithfulness, and also warns us not to be surprised by the hostility in this, our temporary home. Second, we work to network, leverage, and empower God’s Church and the Christian business community – groups that have grown silent, frustrated, and isolated. Third, we work to elect good and godly leaders who will pass good legislation and have boldness to speak out into culture.

That’s what we do!

In order to have a Georgia where God is honored, religious freedom flourishes, families thrive, and life is cherished, we have to embrace this multi-faceted approach. With religious freedom battles raging here in Atlanta, and Amazon rumored to be coming to Atlanta under assurances the First Amendment rights will not be protected for everyone here in the state, the time is now to act with extreme urgency.

Will you stand with us? Can we count on your support to advance policies that will protect religious freedom, life and families in our state with a gift to Family Policy Alliance of Georgia?

This week, I’m praying for Jack and all those like him who place Christ over their business. I’m praying for our allies at Alliance Defending Freedom and all who have worked to bring this matter before the Supreme Court. I’m also praying for our culture, that we may one day, once again, have a nation and a Georgia where the Jacks of the world never have to fear, never are threatened, and never spend a day in Court. I ask you to join me in these prayers, to pray for our work in identifying the next leaders of our state, and to consider supporting those efforts.

Hopefully and earnestly praying,

Cole Muzio
President and Executive Director