Religion and spirituality are personal sentiments based on personal growth, not legal precedents meant to rule a country. The religious and political leaders of America have become so insistent on pushing their beliefs onto others that they are bringing them all the way to the Supreme Court.
The concept is; if all of the people in the country lived according to righteousness, there would be no problems or need for courts. But not all people live righteously therefore no country will ever be perfect. Nations are governed based on control of the population mandated by social mores and laws that align with natural and human law.
Natural and human laws are governed by the human conscience, regardless of the religion of the nation. The level of consciousness of any nation will ultimately determine the destiny of that nation. Whether it will stand or fall over time. Once a nation begins to lose its sense of conscience based on natural and human law, it will fall.
Likewise, when a nation begins to control the populous based on personal beliefs instead of natural law, it loses a sense of simplicity and falls into the realm of complexity. The lines are blurred when leadership substitutes personal beliefs for natural law; such as in the cases before the Supreme Court now.
"On Monday, the court appears to have punted again. Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries is virtually identical to Masterpiece Cakeshop. It involves another baker who discriminated against a same-sex couple, and who claims that their religion gives them a constitutional right to violate a state civil rights law."
If religion cannot operate outside of a man-made document such as the constitution, it is no more religion, but a state run policy. In other words, man has taken it upon himself to define what is right and wrong; excluding the concept of natural and human law. This then leaves consciousness in the hands of man to determine what we should think and do.
If man has control of the human conscience and can exercise law; that means no one will have the right to be free. It means that if and when man decides what is natural and what is humane, the rest of the populous will have no religious freedom and man has become God. This is dangerous and twisted logic.
Slavery was a perfect example. Man took it upon himself to replace the natural and human laws of freedom and instituted bondage based on what he believed was right, and then justified it using religion and a written constitution. Same as in the court case above. Man cannot legalize discrimination based on what a person believes their religion gives them a right to.
However, keeping in context with the case, if the baker does not want to serve same-sex couples because he/she believes it jeopardizes their standing with God, they should not be ordered to serve them. The couple should go to someone who will serve them. The courts should not determine this.
If the baker decided not to serve Black people, the courts should not order them to. In either case, natural law determines what happens to people who make those type decisions based on what they believe. Which by consequence will be they will never have any Black or same-sex customers, and most likely not many white ones either.
If Christianity (or any religion) is the bases on what people determine is right, the Bible says “love covers a multitude of sins,” and to “love thy neighbor;” therefore, it is a person’s own choice how to treat others overall, which goes back to religion being a personal sentiment based on personal growth. Some people are naturally discriminatory while others are more tolerant.
People sell alcohol to others with no problem, whether they are religious or not and regardless of what race they are; even though the Bible speaks against drunkenness. Guns are sold to people of all races, so is drugs (legal and illegal). So it is not what is being sold, it is who it is being sold to that is a problem with some people. The courts should be more concerned with what is being sold; not who it is being sold or not sold to.
Nevertheless, the courts are out of place when they intervene using the law to control personal beliefs and to enforce acts contrary to natural law. Without understanding of natural law, however, the laws of the land will never be aligned with human rights. This is a real problem in America because the founders were never really aligned with natural law; they were founded on discrimination.