Atheists and Cakes

[Amarok]

And the stupidity of comparing a free agent like a movie director to a baker with a shop can't be overstated

Well I am trying to understand this issue which seems to be more complicated that participants in this topic seem to be are aware of. I am not saying that I am right but rather "prove me wrong".
I guess the main reason we can't understand each other is the notion of baking cakes being an art. Some of you clearly don't think it is and perhaps that's why we don't understand each other, and perhaps this is what we should be debating.

And let's presume it is, like Supreme Court says it is (although I myself have a hard time accepting it) then there is no reason not to compare a cake baker with a painter or sculptor or an architect or a film director etc. I mean there is nothing stopping you to pick up Yellow Pages and call some sculptor and order a sculpture which he can reject.

Now there is this issue with "he has a bakery shop where everyone can enter" where I guess you're trying to say that people can enter and drink coffee and eat cakes and that these services should not be refused on these ground and I agree, but I've seen many bakeries where you can only enter and order cakes and nothing else, like this one



Or maybe these two bakers can't compare to each other since this woman seems much more serious if not more artistic in her work than "that guy"?

But then there are also other non artistic services which people can object to do. Like it is now a case with lawyers and Trump, since no respectable lawyer wants to take him as a client.

There are some serious problem with this argument . Being Trump isn't a legal protected class . Being Gay is . Discriminating against someone for being a protected class is unconstitutional . If a lawyer refuses to defend a gay person because they are gay that is also unconstitutional.

---

It doesn't actually matter whether or not a person is an "artist" - that was just some nonsense they went for to attack civil rights as a free speech issue.  Like I said, maximum cynicism, lol.

If an "artist" opens up a shop that serves the public, they've created an expectation of service - which puts them under the purview of public accom laws.  It's not complicated in the slightest, it's just very...very lucrative to manufacture these cases, and the issue is culturally sensitive enough to keep courts poking it with poles for a lifetime.

And gays are a protected class . Being Trump isn't .