| >He was accused of refusing to bake a cake celebrating a same-sex wedding event. No. He was accused of refusing to treat a gay couple equal to a straight couple. And that is what he did. He repeatedly admitted to refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. He would bake cakes for straight couples without a problem. Gay couples? Nope. >Phillips was perfectly willing to bake cakes for clients of any sexual orientation, No he wasn't, this is a lie. >he just didn't want to send a message in support of a specific event There was no "message sending". He's perfectly willing to bake cakes for weddings of straight couples. He isn't for weddings of gay couples. Dishonestly portraying it as "oh he just doesn't want to send a message" would only make sense if he refused to bake cakes for all weddings. The only difference he cared about is that the couple is gay, that's why he refused them. This is behaviour that should be condemned, the proponents of such behaviour are not victims, they're evil. |
No. What he refused to do was bake a cake for the specific event of a marriage between two people of the same sex. There is no inherent law of nature forcing someone of a particular sexual orientation to marry someone of a particular sex. Who you marry is a choice; Phillips's religious beliefs tell him that he should not approve of some of those possible choices, and he has a right to hold those beliefs (and you or I have a right to disagree with them).