[daniel1212]

I do think there's quite a difference between accommodating people with a certain skin color not of their own choosing versus freely chosen political or religious beliefs, particularly where the accommodation requires a business owner to effectively surrender their belief in deference to the contrary view of their customer.

God bless you for the intelligent analysis. The problem is that as said, the right to a behavior, or celebration related to that, is equated with skin color, etc.

And discrimination against sodomy now means a refusal to help affirm it.

The judge in this case would have to fine a vegean or PETA baker for not making a cake to celebrate a butcher shop opening. What would be the chance of that?

[Springfield Reformer]

LOL! Yes, that would be perfect. Odds of it happening? Preeeetty low. Well, unless we could get the litigious equivalent of a James O’keefe to stage a case just like that (like the aclu used to do all the time). Think of the messaging value! The attorneys could rise above it, but the average lib hearing about this would be getting some serious cognitive dissonance out of it. Find the right analogy, and you can make your point even with a lefty, if they’re not yet hardened beyond hope. I’ve seen it happen.