Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2

[Ravenshire]

No, the state of Colorado is telling everyone who runs a business open to the public that they don't get to discriminate against protected classes. The asshole baker is just too fucking stupid to figure that out. He insists on continuing in discriminatory practices and he's going to continue to get slapped down.

Completely not true. There was no discrimination based on protected class.

From the Statements of Fact of the filed complaint: HERE

“Colorado has announced the general rule that expressive business owners, including cake artists, do not violate the public-accommodation law if they decline to create a custom item expressing a message that they would not communicate for anyone. In the  Masterpiece  case, Colorado told the Supreme Court how this general rule applies to cake artists. Colorado said that it allows cake artists to decline to create custom cakes featuring  pro-LGBT themes or symbols: “If [a cake artist] would not sell a … cake with a particular artistic theme,” such as a “cake featuring a symbol of gay pride,” “to any customer, regardless of that customer’s protected characteristics, he need not sell one to [anyone].” Colorado further explained that it allows cake artists to decline to create custom cakes with pro-LGBT designs and messages: “Under the Act, [a cake artist] is free … to decline to sell cakes with ‘pro-gay’ designs or inscriptions.” And Colorado announced that it allows cake artists to decline to create custom cakes that they consider offensive: “Businesses are entitled to reject orders … because they deem a particular product requested by a customer to be ‘offensive.’”

Philips has NOT denied service to anyone of a protected class because they are part of a protected class. That is a fact proven by his past practices. However, the baker declines, in general, to make bespoke products expressing messages he finds offensive or which violate his religious beliefs. The State of Colorado is violating its own express standards in order to harass one particular man at the prompting of an activist lawyer with a bogus request motivated by anti-Christian bigotry...the same type that is being clearly displayed here.

And what fucking message was he asked to put on the birthday cake? Or, on the wedding cake for that matter? I don't believe either one asked for pro-anything messages. Or, are you claiming that the cake is the message?

That "statement of facts" reads like an opinion piece from faux news.

Please tell us Neo, how refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding isn't about the customer being gay or refusing to bake a birthday cake (which the asshole claimed in his previous defense that he would do) for a transgender isn't about the gender identity of the customer. Please, at least try. The laughs would make it worth it.