First Amendment? What's that?

And that's the society we live in today, thanks be to God. Repeatedly claiming that these various Christian business owners "refused to serve gays" based on their sexual preference alone will not make it true--because it isn't. In some case the plaintiffs had been previous customers of the same business. And here's the $64,000 question no one is asking: How would the business owner even have any knowledge of a potential customer's sexual preference? A heterosexual person could just as easily request a same-sex wedding cake or t-shirt for a friend or relative as could a homosexual.

In fact, I would challenge you to find just one instance in the past 40 years of a single business in America that refused to serve someone solely because of skin color, sexual preference, or religious belief. No business in that time (and perhaps even further) has ever said "you're black?", "you're gay?", "you're Muslim?"--we won't serve you here. Google all you want, I guarantee it hasn't happened.

Another point of clarification: the society you (and I) prefer in this regard is not more "orderly", it is more just. I would argue that justice is the highest virtue of civil society. Nazi Germany and the Jim Crow South were very "orderly", but not in the way that benefited everyone fairly. These were unjust systems that--happily--we have left behind.

Maybe it will, maybe it won’t... but, in the mean time, it is your perception that is out if step and your argument is defeated BECAUSE you are wrong for this period in time.

Let's assume they are straight and not getting married...does that change anything? Would the baker be right to refuse them?



I'm not sure but I think we know that because these races are fictitious.



So you're ok with anyone claiming the religious exemption no matter how wild or crazy their religious claim?

BTW, I'm pretty sure the phrase is "screw you over"...not "under".

Now that I can agree with.

While all those reasons are pretty funny, none of them are backed by traditional Christian dogma.  The refusal to celebrate a homosexual wedding is.

The butcher, the baker, the chicken sandwich maker.... so you can close down whom you disagree with as well as make whomever do what you want them to do as we saw with the baker. Sorry people , but those whom fear the left are correct to do so,, it is a path to to·tal·i·tar·i·an·ism.

How to Disunite America
townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2019/11/20/how-to-disunite-america-n2556749

This week, Chick-fil-A, the immensely popular Christian-owned chicken sandwich giant, caved to the cultural left. For years, the left targeted Chick-fil-A, dating back to the 2012 revelation that Chairman and CEO Dan Cathy supports traditional marriage -- and, horror of horrors, that charities given donations by Chick-fil-A support traditional marriage. This prompted paroxysms of outrage in the media, who quickly demanded that Chick-fil-A tow the Democratic Party line, despite the fact that then-President Barack Obama did not officially endorse same-sex marriage until May 2012.

The rage of the cultural left led to unsuccessful boycotts -- Chick-fil-A's business expanded from $1 billion in 2001 to $5 billion in 2013 to $10.5 billion today -- but successful hijackings of local government. When the cultural left can't achieve what it wants through public mobilization, it simply uses the power of government to blackmail those it dislikes.

So, despite the fact that Chick-fil-A had never discriminated against gay customers -- it would sell a chicken sandwich to anyone -- then-Boston Mayor Thomas Menino promised to ban the franchise from the city. Then-Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel quickly followed suit, pledging to support an alderman's plan to block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant at Chicago O'Hare Airport. San Antonio recently blocked Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant at its airport, and the airport in Buffalo, New York, followed suit. San Jose, California, pledged not to renew Chick-fil-A's lease when it ran out.