Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Round 2

[Lucanus]

The line/test for me is: would the baker refuse to bake the same cake if the use was not obvious.

So to clarify, if the cake was completely generic, but the customer just so happened to mention (without being asked) that it was for a particular cause, the Baker still has to make it since the cake itself is generic? Even if he was told what it was for and strongly opposes the cause?

---

Tbf I think there is a threshold for "personal moral reasons". If I refused to bake a Neo Nazi's birthday cake with designs of swastikas and other Nazi imagery that would be reasonable.

So that is my question. How would the law go about dictating what would and would not be allowed to be refused? The swastika drawings, I get. What if the cake was generic (no swastikas on it), but the customer voluntarily told you it was for a white supremacist gathering. Should you be legally allowed to refuse?

Yes. White supremacists = hate group.

We can argue about what lies in the middle, like the circumcision case. But refusing service because of someone's sexual orientation is the same as doing so because of the colour of someone's skin. Despicable, bigoted and a major dick move.