Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2

[Angrboda]

Even in that case, the Christian prohibition is against same-sex acts, not against same-sex unions.  The bible didn't foresee that development, and so it is silent on that score.  Given that the bible is silent on whether same-sex marriage is or isn't a valid sacrament, it seems rather obvious that the baker was originally objecting to the homosexual orientation of the customers.  One can infer that Christianity condemns same-sex marriage, but it's not a direct and obvious reading of the bible, anymore than that God approved of chattel slavery can be directly read in the bible.  One has to take the sanction about homosexual acts in the bible and extrapolate from that to reach an opposition to the sacrament being applied to same-sex unions.  Similar problems hold with a Catholic conception of the sacrament, as natural law is a philosophical position, not a biblical one.  The Catholic church can, and an individual baker also can believe whatever they want regardless of whether it's biblical or not, but then you have to open up the whole can of worms as to what is protected in terms of religious objections.  If I claim to be a religion of one person, can I use that to exempt me from any law I see fit just by changing my beliefs to suit?

A union or marriage is an act! Also that's a lot of words for semantics that wouldn't fly in court at all.

---

I feel sorry for the people being discriminated against but hey the court has spoken.

I wouldn't want to go to a store and be denied service or products because of who I am or because my views are different. Why should trans people? But I guess there will always be ignorance and stupidity. I know for a fact that forcing the fools by law to serve me wouldn't actually change their negativity towards me. (In fact might make it worse!)

So might as well go elsewhere

If your posts in this thread are any indication, you know fuckall about what the law and the courts have to say on the matter.

So I'm going to take your opinion with a huge grain of salt.

(And no, the bible sanctioned homosexual sex specifically, not all acts by homosexuals, so your bullshit about it being a semantic argument is just that: bullshit.)