Bakers are forced to bake cakes that celebrate because they are told they can’t discriminate against others, even though they are refusing service not because of who that other person is, but of what they want to celebrate. So, if this really was all about treating people equally, than such imposition on bakers, amongst others, would be applied equally, and anyone could be forced to express an opinion they disagree with, if it is somehow related to who that person is.
“Last week, the Colorado Civil Rights Division ruled that Denver’s Azucar Bakery did not discriminate against William Jack, a Christian from Castle Rock, by refusing to make two cakes with anti-gay messages and imagery that he requested last year.
“The dispute began March 13, 2014 when Jack went to the bakery at 1886 S. Broadway and requested two cakes shaped like bibles. He asked that one cake have the image of two groomsmen holding hands in front of a cross with a red ‘X’ over them. He asked that the cake be decorated with the biblical verses, ‘God hates sin. Psalm 45:7’ and ‘Homosexuality is a detestable sin. Leviticus 18:2′, according to the Civil Rights Divisions’ decision.
“The agency’s decision found that the baker did not discriminate against Jack based on his creed. Instead, officials state the evidence shows Silva refused to make the cakes because the customer’s requests included ‘derogatory language and imagery.'”
In effect, the Colorado so-called Civil Rights Division declared that the Bible is obscene and that it wasn’t religious discrimination to discriminate against someone and deny them service because of their religious belief. That the bible is considered by the state to be evil and censorable, while forcing people to celebrate a behavior is contrary to millennia old beliefs is reminiscent of the anti-free speech actions of Canada.
It also makes it clear that forcing bakers to bake gay wedding is not, nor was it ever about equality. You can be forced by the state to support one view on Gay Marriage, but be blocked from expressing a dissenting view.
Laws need to be content neutral, lest they be gross violations of the 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment in Colorado is now null and void. If the message is a politically correct one, it must be expressed because of “equality”; if the message is not politically correct, then it can be banned because business have a right to not express “inappropriate” messages.
The 1st Amendment existed to protect unpopular opinion from the government, and to protect people from popular opinion that they do not agree with. People no longer have that protection.