Separate question. Was the CCRC being inconsistent in its ruling in the case of Mr. Jack, who was refused service because the goods he requested contained anti-gay scriptural messages that the bakers in question found offensive, and the ruling in the Phillips case in which the service was refused, ostensibly, because it offended his sensibilities?
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)