The concept of a right relates to the freedom from interference by other individuals or the government. Individual rights refer to the liberties of each individual to pursue life and goals without interference from other individuals or the government. Examples of individual rights include the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as stated in the United States Declaration of Independence. Throughout history protections and violations of individual rights have been an ongoing source of conflict between governments and individuals.
On July 7, 2017, The Justice Department filed a brief supporting the Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple on faith-based grounds, in the latest religious freedom case to be considered before the nation’s highest court.
Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, refused create a cake for a homosexual wedding, claiming a religious exemption to the state’s anti-discrimination law.
“When Phillips designs and creates a custom wedding cake for a specific couple and a specific wedding, he plays an active role in enabling that ritual, and he associates himself with the celebratory message conveyed,”
Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey B. Wall wrote in the brief. Wall added, “Forcing Phillips to create expression for and participate in a ceremony that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs invades his First Amendment rights.”
In addition to this instance, Phillips also had a history of refusing to provide his services for Halloween cakes, anti-American cakes, adult-themed cakes, cakes containing alcohol, and cakes that would disparage others. In this instance, the business owners individual right to conduct his business in a way that he sees fit is being violated.
This case is connected in theme and case law to the 2014 affront to a business owner’s individual rights when the owners of Hobby Lobby were forced to sue Health and Human services regarding certain portions of the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act. In this landmark religious freedom case the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby, stating that corporations can refuse to provide certain drugs in their healthcare plan that violated their religious beliefs.
In a five to four decision, the highest court in the land ruled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to privately owned businesses like Hobby Lobby. the root of this problem begins in the Affordable Care Act. The law stipulates that employers need to provide health care for their employees that covers all forms of contraception at no cost. However, some for-profit corporations have insisted they should not have to pay for all of these services — especially those that conflict with their beliefs. The owners of Hobby Lobby do not have a problem with offering healthcare that covers most forms of birth control, but they draw the line at providing contraceptives that end human life after conception. The question these cases are seeking to solve is whether for-profit companies have a right to exercise religious freedom under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a federal law passed in 1993 that states the “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” If they do, does the government have a compelling interest to override it in this instance?
Summary
Freedom of religion is considered to be a fundamental individual right. In both of the cases that are listed above, individual rights have been under attack. Both the cake shop owner and the owners of Hobby Lobby had their individual religious freedom rights violated.
- Fuller, Jaime. “Here’s what you need to know about the Hobby Lobby case.” The Washington Post (WP Company LLC), 25 Mar. 2017, washingtonpost.com. Accessed 2 Sept. 2017.
- Chamberlain, Samuel . “Cake artist at center of religious freedom case opening brief at Supreme Court.” Foxnews.com, Fox News, 31 Aug. 2017, foxnews.com. Accessed 2 Sept. 2017.