No, I am still for the Coffee shop. The “Christian” group was not really harmed, because (a) getting coffer is NOT a “necessity” and (b) nothing prevented them from getting coffee somewhere else. Therefore, the situation does not even meet, in my view, what the “public accommodation” test was originally all about.
I’d like to be a Christian lawyer defending them, to, in the process, demonstrate to them the Liberty principles they in turn should be accepting for Christians, such as Christian bakers who won’t do a “same sex” wedding cake.
Alinsky Rule #4: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
I understand your point, but trials are not about teaching "liberty principles" to homosexual hatemongers, they are about judging defendants based on current laws.
The long term goal should be to change public accommodation laws. One way to do that is to make the laws as unpalatable to the left as they are to the right. In other words, make leftists feel the consequences of living up to their own rules. So, let's do what is necessary to see a few bigoted gay coffee shop owners bankrupted and put out of business by the state for failing to serve Christians.
While we're at it, let's publicize the hell out of the appalling words and behavior of thuggish leftist "victims" like this shopowner.