Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Colorado Baker

[Mr.wizard]

Because you're asking the sign maker to provide a service that he doesn't offer to anyone. In the case of the Baker who makes wedding cakes, they simply asked for a service that he provides and they were denied specifically for the sexual preference, which as far as I know has nothing to do with baking. 

And I wouldn't fly a pro-life banner. I flew banners for other people, but I wouldn't fly one for them. And it had nothing to with airplanes or banners. Should there be a law forcing me to advertising that I don't want to fly?

No, not advertising someones opinion is not covered under anti-discrimination laws. Now if you decided to fly that banner for a heterosexual and refused to fly that banner for a homosexual then that would be discrimination.

---

Because you're asking the sign maker to provide a service that he doesn't offer to anyone. In the case of the Baker who makes wedding cakes, they simply asked for a service that he provides and they were denied specifically for the sexual preference, which as far as I know has nothing to do with baking. 

And I wouldn't fly a pro-life banner. I flew banners for other people, but I wouldn't fly one for them. And it had nothing to with airplanes or banners. Should there be a law forcing me to fly advertising that I don't want to fly?

---

What the Baker refused to do wedding cakes for black couples?

That should be the baker's choice. It not a choice I would personally support. But I believe its a choice a providers of non-essential services should have the right to make. We're not talking about housing or health care here. We're talking about cake. No one needs cake ever.

No, we are talking about civil rights, and the business owner has a choice, he could not run a business open to the public if he doesn't want to follow the rules.