Vincent van Gogh’s “The Starry Night” (1889, oil on canvas) holds pride of place in The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in Manhattan. It is a work of great art in part because it is exists for no other reason than for us to look at it.

What is it about Colorado?

First, there was the baker who didn’t want to make wedding cakes for gay couples. He told the U.S. Supreme Court that it violated his artistic and religious freedoms.

Now we have Lorie Smith, a Colorado website designer, who’s making pretty much the same argument before the court.

Like the baker, Smith is entitled to her opinions. What she is not entitled to is to misuse language and misrepresent art. She is not an artist. Art is about nothing more than itself. It exists for no other purpose than for the artist to express himself. The artist may sell the work or accept a commission. But that’s not why artists create work. They create because they cannot not create. They create, because they are compelled to do so.

Smith on the other hand is a graphic designer creating websites for engaged couples. She may have an aesthetic sense. She may be skilled. You may call her a digital artisan or craftsman. But she is not an artist.

As someone who is a writer — a journalist, a novelist and a longtime cultural reporter and arts critic — I take issue with people who manipulate language and art for political ends as well as with people who don’t take the time to use language precisely or to think about what constitutes a work of art.

Smith and her lawyer should simply have the courage of their convictions and say she doesn’t want to serve gay people.

But leave art out of it.