Quantum Windbag
Gold Member
- May 9, 2010
- 58,308
- 5,100
I see it as no different if they had said they won't serve Black people.
And I agree they had the right to refuse but now they have to live with the consequences of that decision.
And the consequences for bigotry in today's society are severe.
Wrong. They did NOT refuse to serve gay people. They refused to participate in an activity they did not condone. They don't refuse to serve black people. But if the black people were wanting them to deliver and set up products at some sort of voodoo ceremony or Satanic festival, and they refused the order on that basis due to their religious convictions, THAT would be comparable to refusing to serve a gay wedding.
And if you think it is okay to destroy somebody's livelihood for what YOU define as bigotry, then it is okay if they destroy your livelihood for what THEY define as bigotry?
If holding unpopular beliefs is justification for having one's business destroyed due to the bigotry of others, then we have no freedom left in America. Because to condemn and intentionally destroy people for what they believe is the worst form of bigotry.
And freedom loving people will condemn it every time because it is pure evil.
Baking a cake is not participating in a marriage it is baking a cake.
Baking a cake is art, and protected under the 1st Amendment.
Want to try and argue that your grandmother didn't consider what she did art?