Supreme Court, for 3rd time, considers Colorado’s anti-Christian agenda

For the third time in just a handful of years, Colorado is at the U.S. Supreme Court over its demands that it control the faith, beliefs and speech of people in its state.

Specifically, people who do business. First it was a cake baker, then a web designer and now it’s a counselor.

In the newest case, which is just developing at the high court, the state is demanding that Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor, share only the state-approved faith messages regarding the LGBT agenda.

According to a report from ADF, which is representing Chiles, “Many of Chiles’ clients come to her because they share her Christian faith. These clients believe their lives will be more fulfilling if they grow comfortable with their bodies rather than pursuing a path of harmful drugs or surgeries. Yet Colorado law censors Chiles from speaking words her clients want to hear and insists that counselors can only help young people by encouraging them to identify inconsistent with their sex.”

It’s the state’s adopted beliefs in the LGTB ideologies that are at issue.

“The government has no business censoring private conversations between clients and counselors,” Jim Campbell, a lawyer for the ADF, said. “There is a growing consensus around the world that adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria need love and an opportunity to talk through their struggles and feelings. Colorado’s law harms these young people by depriving them of caring and compassionate conversations with a counselor who helps them pursue the goals they desire.”

Colorado officials have made it illegal to encourage, through counseling, that people, including young people, abandon the LGBT ideology and work to establish a comfort level being the sex they were born.

“We are eager to defend Kaley’s First Amendment rights and ensure that government officials don’t impose their ideology on private conversations between counselors and clients,” Campbell said.

The ADF’s noted, “Colorado’s law violates Chiles’ freedom of speech by prohibiting licensed counselors from engaging in counseling conversations with clients under age 18 who want to change some expression, behavior, identity, or feeling associated with their ‘sexual orientation or gender identity.’ The law threatens severe penalties, including suspension and even revocation of the counselor’s license.”

The ADF’s opening brief in the case confirms “how the law only prohibits counseling conversations in one direction,” stating, “When counseling young people with gender dysphoria, Colorado allows Chiles to speak if she helps them embrace a transgender identity. But if those clients choose to align their sense of identity with their sex by growing comfortable with their bodies, Chiles must remain silent or risk losing her license, her livelihood, and the career she loves.”

The brief asks the Supreme Court to protect free speech for counselors.

“Counseling is vital speech that helps young people better understand themselves, their desires, their actions, and their identity. Colorado interjects itself into those conversations, silences views it dislikes, and tries to control what those kids believe about themselves and who they can become.”

It was only weeks ago the high court agreed to review the case.

Twice before it has intervened in Colorado’s attempts to dictate beliefs and ideologies.

It first tried to force a baker, Jack Phillips at Masterpiece Cakeshop, to express a pro-LGBT message that violated his religious faith. The high court ended up scolding the state for its “hostility” to Christianity, and the state ended up being sued by Phillips for its unconstitutional actions.

Colorado, led by homosexual Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat-majority legislature and an all-Democrat state Supreme Court, which is so leftist it blatantly tried to interfere with the 2024 presidential election by banning President Donald Trump from the ballot (it was overturned), tried the same scheme against a web designer, at 303 Creative, and took a major loss, again, from the Supreme Court.

It was the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, an often overturned panel, that affirmed the Colorado scheme to censor Christian perspectives.