Serious question/hypothetical for you legal eagle types

You can discriminate by political affiliation so no issues I would think.

I don't think you have to be a legal eagle to answer this question. The courts would most definitely let baker refuse to bake a cake for the Nazi sympathizer. Nazi sympathizers are not cool and the courts are the cool police. Gays are cool right now so you have to serve them now at their every beck and call.

The situation is difficult for me to understand so I'm just taking it all in stride. Just like I don't completely understand women, men are from mars and women are from Venus, well I don't completely understand the courts, hetros are from earth and the courts are from fabulous Uranus.

quote:

---

For instance, let's say you own a bakery and a guy comes into your store wearing a brown shirt, with a swastika arm band. He tells you he wants to order a cake for their upcoming social event. Would the courts force you to bake that cake, even though you are repulsed by their activities?

---

Not a federally or state protected class so no, the courts wouldn't force you to.

In Oregon sexual orientation is a protected class. It isn't in AZ.

If I own a bakery and a homosexual Nazi comes in, I bake him a crappy cake.

quote:

---

the Oregon baker who was forced by the courts to bake a cake for a gay wedding

---

quote:

---

So, to use your words, aren't racist assholes (and their ilk) most in need of protection? Should not the laws against discrimination apply to what one chooses to be? All 1st ammendment protections, if I'm not mistaken, cover actions that citizens CHOOSE, like speech, religion, freedom to assemble, etc.

---

The gay couple are members of a "protected class."

If they choose to target an orthodox muslim baker because of his "antigay beliefs", that is their prerogative. If they demand he make a cake with the image of Muhammed overseeing a gay wedding, it is their right to expect it be made, to command it be made . . . or force the baker to shutter his business.

For the baker it is a sacrilege. For the couple it is a "point to be made". The government is their enabler. Their target is an individual unequal and inferior under the law. The muslim is a lesser citizen than his tormentors.

The eventual extension is for gays to view it as their government-given right to demean, belittle and exclude such lesser citizens.

quote:

---

For instance, let's say you own a bakery and a guy comes into your store wearing a brown shirt, with a swastika arm band. He tells you he wants to order a cake for their upcoming social event. Would the courts force you to bake that cake, even though you are repulsed by their activities?

---

I'm sure it's already been said, but you can't deny service for an arbitrary reason. You could probably make a decent argument that the swastika arm band would offend other patrons and could affect your business.

Either way, it's completely different than when you're dealing with a protected class (I don't think anyone knows what sort of protected class homosexuals fall into).