There are two scenarios that happened.Danieltwotwenty wrote:Just so there is no confusion for you Rick, I will put it into a scenario.
There are two couples one heterosexual (Sam and Samantha) and one homosexual (Sam and Sam), both go to buy a wedding cake with the exact same message on it "Sam & Sam". The cake maker makes the cake with the message for the heterosexual couple but does not for the homosexual couple. Obviously the message is the same in both instances, it is not offensive in anyway shape or form, so we must conclude that the message is not the reason for the discrimination, but instead that couples sexual orientation that is being discriminated against.
The first, is what Kurieuo mentioned in the OP. It's about an Irish baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay man. It wasn't a wedding cake. The man wanted a cake with Bert and Ernie, and a pro gay marriage message.
The second, is a baker in Oregon who was fined around $135k, because they refused to make a "wedding" cake for a lesbian couple.
In the first instance, the man refused to bake the cake because of the message.
In the second, the bakers refused to bake the cake because they believed gay weddings go against their beliefs.
Both are privately run businesses.
In both instances, I believe the business owners should be able to do business according to their beliefs/conscience, without government punishment.
Here's a link to the story about the Oregon bakers.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... cake-case/
As you can see from the article, the bakers have no problem selling cakes to homosexuals. It's the message that the specific cake represented, that they had an issue with.
And since the bakers had no problem selling their products to homosexuals, we must logically conclude that it wasn't discrimination based on the sexual orientation of the customer, but based on the message.