Gay Patriot Header Image

Turning the Tables on Wedding Cake Fascists

Posted by V the K at 3:03 pm - December 13, 2014.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy

A Christian group went to thirteen gay-owned bakeries and requested each of them to bake a cake promoting traditional marriage; and of course, recognizing that they were obligated to serve any customer regardless of ideological differences, they happily obliged.

Nope, just kidding. All thirteen not only refused, but some were very nasty about it.

Christian bakeries that refuse to make pro-homosexual marriage cakes are persecuted throughout America. They get sued, they get fined, they get death threats, and they lose their businesses. So we at called some 13 prominent bakers who are either gay or pro-gay and requested that they make a pro-traditional marriage cake with the words “Gay marriage is wrong” placed on the cake. Each one denied us service, and even used deviant insults and obscenities against us. One baker even said that she would make me a cookie with a large phallus on it.

Video at link.

And you know what… I completely defend their right to refuse to bake a cake in support of something they don’t believe in; because I don’t believe people forfeit their Constitutional rights when they open businesses.

It’s the gay fascist left who are the hypocrites.



  1. Thank you for exposing the sociopathic homonazis…………

    Comment by rjliger — December 13, 2014 @ 3:10 pm - December 13, 2014

  2. Now the followup: lawsuits.

    Lawsuits against every single one of the businesses.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 13, 2014 @ 3:48 pm - December 13, 2014

  3. Ha! That is awesome. Liberals are THE biggest, most intolerant hypocrites ever! The proof is in the icing they just received from Shoebat.

    Comment by runningrn — December 13, 2014 @ 3:58 pm - December 13, 2014

  4. I agree that it is hypocritical but isn’t illegal to tape a phone conversation without consent?

    Comment by mothy67 — December 13, 2014 @ 4:11 pm - December 13, 2014

  5. I approve the general concept, but it would’ve been a much better test if they’d requested the phrase “Marriage means one man, one woman” instead of “Gay marriage is wrong,” which flips the bird at the gay bakers in a far more overt way.

    (If a same-sex couple went to a Christian baker and requested a wedding cake with a big frosting Jesus saying “I’m Jesus and I approve this lesbian marriage,” then THAT easily qualifies as a deliberate poke in the eye and middle-finger to the religious values of the baker. But if the couple merely asks for frosting roses and a pair of linked Venus/Venus symbols, I’d call it a real stretch to say that they’re attacking the baker’s values in the same sense that “gay marriage is wrong” attacks the gay baker’s values. The Christian baker still has a right to refuse making the Venus/Venus cake, IMHO, but wouldn’t be justified in getting ANGRY at the request.)

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 13, 2014 @ 4:17 pm - December 13, 2014

  6. o put it another way, there’s a huge difference between asking a Jewish baker to make a cake that quotes John 3:16 (“for God so loved the world that He gave us His only Son…”) , and asking the same Jewish baker to make a cake quoting Matt. 27:25 (“May his blood be on our heads and our children’s heads!”).

    I can understand why a Jewish baker might politely decline to make a “John 3:16” cake (it’s against Jewish theology to describe God as having a Son), but I would hardly accuse a Christian customer of being intentionally provocative in asking for the cake in the first place.

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 13, 2014 @ 4:37 pm - December 13, 2014

  7. googled shoebat

    It’s a message Shoebat is selling based on his own background as a Palestinian-American convert to conservative Christianity. Born in the West Bank, the son of an American mother, he says he was a Palestinian Liberation Organization terrorist in his youth who helped firebomb an Israeli bank in Bethlehem and spent time in an Israeli jail.
    That billing helps him land speaking engagements like a May event in Rapid City — a forum put on by the state Office of Homeland Security, which paid Shoebat $5,000 for the appearance. He’s a darling on the church and university lecture circuit, with his speeches, books and video sales bringing in $500,000-plus in 2009, according to tax records.
    “Being an ex-terrorist myself is to understand the mindset of a terrorist,” Shoebat told CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”
    But CNN reporters in the United States, Israel and the Palestinian territories found no evidence that would support that biography. Neither Shoebat nor his business partner provided any proof of Shoebat’s involvement in terrorism, despite repeated requests.

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 4:58 pm - December 13, 2014

  8. Walid Shoebat, a Palestinian American who converted from Islam and a former Muslim Brotherhood member, has claimed that ISIS is promoting the “homosexual agenda” by raping men and using recordings to blackmail them, reports Right Wing Watch.

    Shoebat was writing on BarbWire, the virulently homophobic website belonging to anti-gay wingnut Matt Barber.

    6a00d8341c730253ef01b8d070687c970c-800wiReferring to a documentary broadcast on August 27th on the Kurdish station STERK TV in which ISIS members claim that the group has been raping and gang raping men in a ceremony it describes as “marriage” and using the footage to force them to join the terrorist group, Shoebat inexplicably states that the terrorist group’s use of rape as a weapon “is truly the manifestation of the purest form of the homosexual agenda.”

    Oddly referring to “human rights” to show that rapes and gang rapes are used “to assassinate [victims] while they are still alive”, Shoebat of course makes no coherent argument – in fact no argument at all – to back up his ridiculous, inflammatory and vile opinions connecting homosexuality with rape.

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:00 pm - December 13, 2014

  9. The Jerusalem Post also stated that Shoebat has profited from his story that he was formerly a Muslim terrorist who has rejected Islam for Christianity.[1] When the Post asked Shoebat whether the Walid Shoebat Foundation is a registered charity, he said that it was registered in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section said it had no record of such a charity. When asked again, Shoebat claimed it was registered under a different name, but that he was not aware of the Foundation’s registered name, nor any other details, which were known only to his manager. Dr. Joel Fishman of the Allegheny County Law Library in Pennsylvania expressed doubts about Walid Shoebat Foundation’s donation process. He noted that if the money was being given to a registered charity, the charity would have to make annual reports to the state and federal government

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:03 pm - December 13, 2014

  10. Happy Holidaze

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:11 pm - December 13, 2014

  11. Nice job, V the K.

    The fact that it drew out lying and pathetic hypocrite Cut-N-Paste is just gravy.

    Notice how Cut-N-Paste, who has screamed and pissed himself that you must be forced to provide service to everyone who asks for it, does not attack the businesses or demand they follow the same rules.

    This shows you are a malignant liar, rusty. You lose.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:15 pm - December 13, 2014

  12. Business aren’t supposed to discriminate no matter what side of the fence you’re on. It’s not only a slippery slope, it’s illegal. If the Christian groups are being discriminated against they need to take legal action & the ACLU also plays both sides of any matter.
    If businesses decided to pick & choose & it was legal to do so, it’d be chaos.
    This isn’t just a matter that just because someone doesn’t like someone’s lifestyle, that they think they have a right (they don’t) to refuse business.
    There’s a reason these laws exist. Otherwise, even a gay conservative is going to find themselves locked out, no matter how self-righteous they pretend to be, to fit in to the mainstream of conservatives.
    Also, this isn’t a matter of religious institutions, but a matter of public businesses.

    Comment by Marc — December 13, 2014 @ 5:25 pm - December 13, 2014

  13. The study, published Thursday by the journal Science, suggests that a 20-minute conversation about a controversial and personal issue — in this case a gay person talking to voters about same-sex marriage — can induce a change in attitude that not only lasts, but may also help shift the views of others living in the same household. In other words, the change may be contagious. Researchers have published similar findings previously, but nothing quite as rigorous has highlighted the importance of the messenger, as well as the message.

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:43 pm - December 13, 2014

  14. But Theodore Shoebat . . . Walid Shoebat’s son has some lovely views

    The Bible gives us the illustration as to what violence homosexuals bring to those who believe in God. In the Book of Judges it recounts how a mob of homosexuals desired to come into a home to rape a man: While they were making merry, and refreshing their bodies with meat and drink, after the labour of the journey, the men of that city, sons of Belial, (that is, without yoke,) came and beset the old man’s house, and began to knock at the door, calling to the master of the house, and saying: Bring forth the man that came into thy house, that we may abuse him. (Judges 19:22) The Divine Law against homosexuality establishes civilization and perpetuates its existence. It purges the society of reprobates in order to enable freedom and liberty to flourish. Both the Muslims and the homosexuals are striving for the same goal: the destruction of Christian civilization. Outlaw the sodomite before he outlaws you.
    – See more at:

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 5:52 pm - December 13, 2014

  15. Hey, Rusty

    Bake me a cake that says “Hail, Odin”.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 13, 2014 @ 6:31 pm - December 13, 2014


    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 6:45 pm - December 13, 2014

  17. The story begins in the northern regions of Europe where the supreme god Odin, also known as Wodan among the German tribes, reigned.

    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 6:46 pm - December 13, 2014

  18. I am tempted to ask my friend Jack Squat what exactly cut-n-paste’s comments have, in anyway, to do with refuting the point of the article. But Jack Squat has better things to do.

    Comment by V the K — December 13, 2014 @ 6:49 pm - December 13, 2014

  19. V the K,

    Rusty doesn’t know how to think or believe for itself. It has Google. It is “My Precious”.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 13, 2014 @ 8:41 pm - December 13, 2014


    Comment by rusty — December 13, 2014 @ 10:03 pm - December 13, 2014

  21. I think he’s “rusty” on thinking for himself.

    Comment by Rob Crawford — December 13, 2014 @ 10:19 pm - December 13, 2014

  22. @ Lobogris: Hail and well met. It’s been a while since I’ve seen you around here. How go things in the wonderful world of heathenry?

    Comment by Sean L — December 13, 2014 @ 10:30 pm - December 13, 2014

  23. […] Written by GayPatriot […]

    Pingback by Turning the Tables on Wedding Cake Fascists - Citizens News — December 13, 2014 @ 10:48 pm - December 13, 2014

  24. The reason is that the pathetic liar rusty is cornered.

    Cut-N-Paste has previously shrieked that no business can ever deny service for any reason, and now that it’s exposed that gay bigots are doing so, Cut-N-Paste has to throw a tantrum and try to derail the thread.

    Your bigotry is exposed, rusty. Your hypocrisy and lies are exposed. And now Christians need to begin using lawfare to destroy and harass gay-owned businesses and gay bigot employees like yourself out of existence.

    Do you understand that, rusty? Your psychosis and hatred are being exposed now. You are shown to be nothing more that a hatemongering bigot who is incompatible with a civil government and society due to your sexual orientation.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 13, 2014 @ 11:33 pm - December 13, 2014

  25. Why is it a surprise that the left is very illiberal and close minded? As they said in the 1960s, “These times are achanging.”

    Comment by davinci — December 14, 2014 @ 12:25 am - December 14, 2014

  26. It’s a good start. If more of these ridiculous premises were used against liberal overreach, maybe they wouldn’t overreach so much.

    I wish we had this kind of spine from Congress. If liberals thought for one minute that Republicans would start issuing executive orders, rewriting existing laws on the fly, and refusing to even debate bills in the senate, they would hesitate to start the precedent.

    Comment by Karen — December 14, 2014 @ 1:48 am - December 14, 2014

  27. I don’t like the lawsuit idea. We don’t want to force people to do things that violate their morals. We need to bring this information to the appeals judges in the form of an amicus brief for every case where a baker, florist, photographer etc. was forced via lawsuit to violate their morals. In the long run, I think that would go a long way toward returning sanity to the situation.

    Comment by Craig Smith — December 14, 2014 @ 2:06 am - December 14, 2014

  28. In a much worse case, a business that makes custom T-shirts is accused of discrimination for refusing to make shirts with an explicit pro-gay marriage message:

    This isn’t about discriminating against customers because of who they are sexually attracted to, it is about forcing people to support the correct message, and punishing those who express incorrect messages.

    Unlike the rest of the Anglo-sphere where they have draconian laws on “politically incorrect” speech, the Left can not do this directly. However, they can use the fact that businesses are “public accommodations” to force them to do what they want as a sneaky way around the 1st Amendment.

    Comment by The Political Hat — December 14, 2014 @ 2:33 am - December 14, 2014

  29. mothy67, whether it is legal to record a conversation without the consent of the other party depends on the state. In no state is it legal to record a conversation of which you are not a party. In many states it is legal as long as one of the two consents (usually the one making the recording). In other states, both parties must consent.

    rusty, you didn’t really think they would find any evidence, did you? No terrorist organization that I know of keeps records, and they invariably disguise themselves. Also, civilians who identify terrorists there usually end up dead. I would think that most reporters would know this, which makes me think they attempted it simply to cast doubt upon his bio, for whatever reason.

    Frankly, if I didn’t know better, rusty, I would think you were engaging in the old “Poisoning the Well” trope. Can’t refute the evidence, so you cast aspersions on the messenger.

    Comment by Craig Smith — December 14, 2014 @ 3:32 am - December 14, 2014

  30. @ Sean L: Hail and well met. I’ve been in Trinidad for the last 8 weeks getting paid and enjoying the good life. No Heathens down here. 😀
    It is an interesting place. Hindu, Christian and Muslim all living together on a fairly small island. And there is no religious fighting. Nice people who like to party. A LOT.

    I follow the doings on the blog. I just don’t comment very often. Probably a good thing. Especially over rape or false rape allegation articles.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 14, 2014 @ 8:53 am - December 14, 2014

  31. Rusty, speaking of ad hominem arguments, did you hear the founder of HRC was convicted of raping a 15 year old?

    Comment by PJ — December 14, 2014 @ 9:29 am - December 14, 2014

  32. The bakers should all be sued for religious discrimination.

    And no, it is not illegal to record a phone call in most jurisdictions, as long as one of the persons involved is aware of the recording.

    Comment by Kristophr — December 14, 2014 @ 11:33 am - December 14, 2014

  33. “13.The study, published Thursday by the journal Science, suggests that a 20-minute conversation about a controversial and personal issue — in this case a gay person talking to voters about same-sex marriage can induce a change in attitude that not only lasts, but may also help shift the views of others living in the same household”

    I agree, this is why all this ramming gay topics down everybody’s throat is turning people against.

    It is reading idiots like rusty that bring disgust all over.

    Comment by Susan — December 14, 2014 @ 11:49 am - December 14, 2014

  34. Asking someone to bake a cake with an opinion isn’t the same thing as a wedding cake. But this case illustrates the need for society to recognize that individuals reserve the right of free association.

    Acme Christian Cakes has no more obligation to bake a wedding cake for Jim and Steve anymore than Fabulous Cakes Company has an obligation to bake cakes for Westboro.

    I realize that this right has risks (e.g. a “no whites” or “no blacks” business) but the risks, IMHO, as less problematic than government edict. All rights entail risks – one of the costs of liberty.

    Comment by KCRob — December 14, 2014 @ 12:41 pm - December 14, 2014

  35. I can see how being lectured by an Obamabot for 20 minutes might cause a lasting change in one’s attitude… From indifference to overt hostility, for example.

    Comment by V the K — December 14, 2014 @ 1:30 pm - December 14, 2014


    Comment by rusty — December 14, 2014 @ 1:40 pm - December 14, 2014

  37. They should have asked that the cake be baked for a traditional marriage gathering.

    Frankly I’m not shocked that gay owned businesses would react this way. The left has to be one of the most hypocritical groups out there.

    Comment by Just Me — December 14, 2014 @ 1:45 pm - December 14, 2014

  38. “Asking someone to bake a cake with an opinion isn’t the same thing as a wedding cake.”

    Yes, it is. The idea that it’s a “wedding” is as offensive to those forced to make the cake as the message on these cakes.

    Comment by Rob Crawford — December 14, 2014 @ 2:22 pm - December 14, 2014

  39. Hey Cut-N-Paste:

    Funny how a supposed “court-appointed guardian” of minors such as yourself can’t say anything about the people you support and endorse being arrested for pedophilia and child molestation, can you?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 14, 2014 @ 4:48 pm - December 14, 2014

  40. “Asking someone to bake a cake with an opinion isn’t the same thing as a wedding cake.”

    How dare you tell someone else what to put on their wedding cake!

    Comment by DaveP. — December 14, 2014 @ 5:47 pm - December 14, 2014

  41. Lobogris & Sean- I should point out that Heimdal is the norse god of gays. When a black guy played him in the movie those in the norse pantheon said it must have been a mistranslation of the description of him having a dirty backside but palest skin, so he would be the god of bottoms.

    Comment by Steve — December 14, 2014 @ 6:32 pm - December 14, 2014

  42. @ Steve: LOL!!!!! OK.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 14, 2014 @ 7:13 pm - December 14, 2014

  43. @ Steve: If any god is the god of homosexuality, it’s Odin. Yes, the head honcho, Anthony Hopkins with a eyepatch. He was so desperate to know everything that he even learned seidh, a type of magic typically only used by women, from the goddess Freya. And it’s powered by a certain bodily fluid… so yeah, Odin could be said to swing both ways, depending on your view. And the only god who gave him any grief about it was Loki. Who, as anybody who has watched any of the Marvel movies knows, is kind of the villain of Norse religion.

    Comment by Sean L — December 14, 2014 @ 10:34 pm - December 14, 2014

  44. This is my “Editors Note via my posting on my FaceBook:
    [Editors note: I watched the videos… the caller was a bit too combative with the employees at the shop for me — often times not the owner. He was expecting them to answer a deep social question in comparing their not wanting to do business with him AS COMPARED to Christian bakers. Which is fine, but just because your gay doesn’t mean you have a complete political picture of current events to make erudite commentary. In other words, Jay Leno’s “man on the street” interviews would apply to all people — even gay ones, d u h h! I look forward to the day someone with a hidden camera tries the same at a few bakeries and it is edited well, maybe with follow up interviews or open camera confrontations. Maybe GP will spend the money to such a thing? They know enough video people who love liberty enough to make the point well?]

    Comment by PapaGiorgio — December 15, 2014 @ 8:52 am - December 15, 2014

  45. […] another post GP makes the point of the hypocrisy of those led not by reason and law but by emotion, and how the […]

    Pingback by Reason vs. Emotion ~ Special Rights and the Power of the State | Religio-Political Talk (RPT) — December 15, 2014 @ 9:17 am - December 15, 2014

  46. Good for them! Points out the immediate hypocrisy with the gay nazis.

    Comment by Jonathan G — December 15, 2014 @ 11:39 am - December 15, 2014

  47. […] Because Gay Bakers seem to think they don’t. […]

    Pingback by On the Cake-Baking Front of the Culture Wars… | Andrew J. Patrick — December 15, 2014 @ 12:12 pm - December 15, 2014

  48. …because I don’t believe people forfeit their Constitutional rights when they open businesses.

    Civil rights act of 1964 (as amended) says differently. The government CAN tell you who your customers are and how you will serve them. They can also tell you who your neighbors will be, Who your employees will be and how you will relate to them. Once you accept that the government can run your business to make things better for Blacks, you are now only negotiating about the terms of your surrender

    Comment by No One — December 15, 2014 @ 3:08 pm - December 15, 2014

  49. lol, I can’t believe they went so far as to request cakes that expressed “gay marriage is wrong.” lmao

    I suppose what’s being argued here is that they should have had the right for a business to make a cake that said, “F*ggots should all rot in H*ll,” by that logic.


    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — December 15, 2014 @ 4:24 pm - December 15, 2014

  50. Yes Vince, because ‘it’s wrong’ is exactly like ‘rot in Hell’

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 15, 2014 @ 4:33 pm - December 15, 2014

  51. @49 and 50. That’s the point. The instription on the cake needs to be as patently over the top offensive as possible to prove the point. They should put signs in the windows saying “no blacks” too. The point is, “IT”S MY BUSINESS AND I WILL RUN IT ANY WAY I WANT TO”.

    Comment by No One — December 16, 2014 @ 9:29 am - December 16, 2014

  52. If you let folks pick and choose, you are going to see “no Jews” “no Catholics” and ” no Blacks” signs again. And ad in no gays, Muslims, and probably half a dozen other groups to the list that someone will want to exclude.

    If you want to open a “public accommodation” then you have to play by the rules.

    I actually hope these Christian groups sue and win. No one side gets to make the rules.

    Comment by Zendo Deb — December 16, 2014 @ 12:32 pm - December 16, 2014

  53. No one has addressed my point in #5 and #6, so I’ll say it more bluntly:

    Theodore Shoebat asked 13 gay-owned bakeries to make cakes with the overtly provocative message “Gay marriage is wrong”. When they all refused, some of them in very vulgar terms, Shoebat used this as evidence of anti-Christian animus among gays.

    There may well BE anti-Christian animus among gays, but Shoebat’s “test” was much too provocative to be taken as evidence of this.

    Again, if a hypothetical Jewish baker responded to a Christian’s request for a “Matthew 27:25” cake by saying “Get the hell out my shop, you Jew-baiting goyishe shmuck”, it would FAIL TO ESTABLISH anti-Christian “animus” — it would merely demonstrate that the Jewish baker is well-informed about the sordid history of this one particular verse as a rationalization for Christian pogroms against Jews.

    But conversely, if the Jewish baker said “Get the hell out of my shop, you Jew-baiting goyishe shmuck” to a Christian customer who’d innocently requested a “John 3:16″cake, that WOULD tend to establish anti-Christian animus, because that verse from John is couched in purely positive terms (it happens to be logically incompatible with Jewish theology, but it’s in no way hostile to Jews).

    Furthermore, it should be obvious that Shoebat’s test can only establish “gay hypocrisy” to the extent that the gay business owners he called had personally supported the laws forcing Christian bakers to make gay wedding cakes (while not wanting these laws to apply to themselves).

    In short, while Theodore Shoebat may claim to be taking a stance for conservative/traditionalist values, he’s an “ally” of questionable integrity who may have his own anti-gay animus — and you shouldn’t shoot the messenger Rusty for pointing this out.

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 16, 2014 @ 7:17 pm - December 16, 2014

  54. Theodore Shoebat… may have his own anti-gay animus

    F’rinstance, he quoted that story about attempted male-on-male gang rape from Judges 19 — but apparently chose to omit the fact the the incident ends with the mob of “homosexual” men gang-raping a FEMALE concubine to death. That’s not what I would call honest exegesis!

    P.S. There’s a story from Jewish folklore, recounted in the Talmud, about a young woman of Sodom who is gang-raped-to-death by the “homosexual” men of the city after she shows charity to an outsider. So the Judges 19 account blends that folkloric element of heterosexual rape with the familiar Sodom story in Genesis 19.

    Comment by Throbert McGee — December 16, 2014 @ 7:29 pm - December 16, 2014

  55. Happy Chrismukkah Throbert

    Comment by rusty — December 16, 2014 @ 10:23 pm - December 16, 2014


    Comment by rusty — December 16, 2014 @ 10:28 pm - December 16, 2014

  57. A better equivalent in cake design would be “Congratulations on beating homosexuality”

    “We don’t want to force people to do things that violate their morals. ”

    Bring a gun to a gun fight, a religion to a religious war, and a lawyer to a legal fight. You can’t beat them if you are playing a different game.

    Comment by Will Best — December 17, 2014 @ 12:08 pm - December 17, 2014

  58. Ah, I see, Throbert.

    So you’re establishing that, rather than the person who has to do the work being the arbiter of what is and isn’t offensive, that you in fact are the arbiter of what is and isn’t offensive.

    And since you, rather than the person, are the arbiter of what is and isn’t offensive, you can compel the person to work against their will with threat of legal penalty and no recourse on their part.

    The easier, more logical, and far more Constitutional pathway here is that the person doing the work gets to choose whether or not they want to do so and whether or not they wish to take offense.

    All you are doing is trying to establish a system that puts you in charge of determining who can and can’t discriminate based on whether you think something is offensive, instead of the business owner who it actually affects.

    More entertainingly, you’re ignoring that the bigot rusty who you’re trying to spin for has screamed and shrieked that NOTHING qualifies as “offensive” or an exception, and that Christians must always bake cakes for gay-sex weddings or the government shuts them down.

    In short, not only are you violating rights, you’re supporting and endorsing bigots like rusty and demanding Christians follow a value structure that you yourself will not and that you will not demand gay bigots like rusty follow.

    That’s why you weren’t answered. KCRob put it much more effectively:

    Asking someone to bake a cake with an opinion isn’t the same thing as a wedding cake. But this case illustrates the need for society to recognize that individuals reserve the right of free association.

    Acme Christian Cakes has no more obligation to bake a wedding cake for Jim and Steve anymore than Fabulous Cakes Company has an obligation to bake cakes for Westboro.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 18, 2014 @ 9:05 pm - December 18, 2014

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.