The 3 - March 10, 2019

This week's assortment of stories impacting the Christian community, The 3, involves a case that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected dealing with using taxpayer-funded historic preservation dollars for church repairs.  Also, an Alabama man is suing an abortion clinic because it performed an abortion on his pregnant girlfriend without his consent.  And, a Colorado commission has decided not to pursue a complaint against the same cake baker who won a Supreme Court ruling.

3 - New Jersey denies church rights to preservation funds, SCOTUS denies appeal, new justice balks

Almost two years after ruling in favor of allowing a religious school to participate in a playground resurfacing grant program, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to accept cases from New Jersey that would have allowed taxpayer historic preservation funds to go to churches.

CNBC.com reports that the New Jersey Supreme Court had "declined to extend the Supreme Court's reasoning" in the playground case "to historic preservation grants, saying the cases are distinct because playground resurfacing is not a religious use, but church repairs are."

But the court's newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh, expressed concern.  The article said:

Kavanaugh, who voted to deny the cases on technical grounds, wrote that preventing preservation funds from going to religious organizations "simply because the organizations are religious" raised "serious questions."

"Barring religious organizations because they are religious from a general historic preservation grants program is pure discrimination against religion," he wrote.

His statement was "joined" by justices Alito and Gorsuch.  He voted not to accept the case because it wasn't the time.  The CNBC article stated:

...Kavanaugh said that it was correct not to review the cases because of certain issues particular to the cases at hand, and because there was not yet sufficient case law in the lower courts on the question.

Justices Thomas and Gorsuch had stated that the ruling in the playground case was too narrow; in my opinion, this sets up a bloc of four conservative justices that could support the extension of historic preservation funds to churches, if the case were to come before it in the future.  The ideological balance on the high court does seem to have shifted, with four liberals, four conservatives, and a new "swing" vote in Chief Justice John Roberts, who had generally been thought to be part of the conservative wing.

2 - Unborn child is plaintiff in lawsuit against Alabama abortion clinic

It is certainly an unfortunate situation, certainly a crisis pregnancy - a 19-year-old young man and a 16-year-old young lady, producing a child.  He claims that he did not want her to have an abortion, but she did it anyway, according to FoxNews.com, which reports that the father, Ryan Magers, now 21, has hired an attorney who is filing a lawsuit and naming the unborn child as a plaintiff.  The lawyer, Brent Helms, says: "We are suing the clinic, the manufacturer of the pill, going after the doctor and going after any professional organization the doctor is affiliated with," adding, "if they are all held liable, it would put a dent on the profitability of abortions." And, as the report says:

On Tuesday, an Alabama county court recognized the aborted fetus, "Baby Roe," as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, making the case one of the first of its kind.

Magers, according to Fox, "claims his girlfriend got a medicated abortion at the Alabama Women's Center for Reproductive Alternatives in Huntsville in February 2017 when she was six weeks pregnant." He had "pleaded with his girlfriend, who was 16, not to get the abortion."

The story also states:

Helms, who is seeking monetary damages and a jury trial, says the ultimate goal is to increase the rights of would-be fathers and strip protections in place for women who are seeking abortions in Alabama.

"I'm here for the men who actually want to have their baby," he said. "I believe every child from conception is a baby and deserves to live."

1 - Jack Phillips survives (another) court challenge

Not too long ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Colorado cake baker Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who had declined to make a cake celebrating a same-sex marriage.  According to WORLD Magazine, according to the high court, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission "showed hostility toward religion in its earlier prosecution of Phillips for declining to make a cake for a same-sex wedding."

Another complaint was filed before the commission because, according to the article, Phillips "refused to bake a cake celebrating a gender transition because of his religious beliefs, sparking another complaint and investigation of Phillips by the Civil Rights Commission."

Jack, in turn, filed a lawsuit against the state, "saying it disregarded the Supreme Court decision by pursuing the second complaint." This week, the Commission announced it would drop the complaint; that decision, according to WORLD, "followed discoveries by Phillips’ attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom that members of the Civil Rights Commission still exhibit anti-religious bias."

ADF Senior Vice President Kristen Waggoner is quoted as saying. “The state’s demonstrated and ongoing hostility toward Jack because of his beliefs is undeniable.”