Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2

[vulcanlogician]

If that can be shown then clearly they are picking and choosing what rules in the bible are suitable for them and have moved beyond the realms of religious conscience already.

Isn't it rather impossible not to pick and choose? I've always said the Bible is too damn big for its own good. There are actually some good moral imperatives in there (stuff that Martin Luther King and Gandhi picked up on), but they do little to no good because they are buried in page after page of "Glorify God!" and "Anything weird is sexually immoral." When faced with that Holy Text Wall, there isn't really much of a choice for modern Christians but to pick a few things and roll with them. The real shame is that those powerful, world-changing moral imperatives often wind up in the waste bin, while the aggrandizement of the religion itself takes front and center.

The question I'm asking myself isn't whether it "can be shown" that the baker willfully ignores one of Jesus commands... it's the fact that he willfully ignores one to begin with. I don't care what can be publicly demonstrated. If he did indeed insist on turning away people who were on their second marriage (when the former spouse still lives) that would cut into his profits, that would earn him some animosity from some of his fellow Christians, and that would demonstrate genuine moral courage. The issue for me isn't whether such-and-such moral position ought to be protected legally, but does such-and-such moral position really amount to shit to begin with. My theory is: no. Christian morality is but a garment that these people wear when they want to be bigots, and they'll take those garments right off the minute they become inconvenient.