Because you're asking that baker to tacitly approve of an act which goes
against their religious beliefs. A private business, not a gov't entity, no less (hence why I don't defend Kim Davis, although I recognize she is apparently legally entitled to a religious accommodation even if I don't think she is). Would you have a problem if that same baker, or a Muslim baker, refused to bake a cake for a NAMBLA wedding? A Hokie/sheep wedding? A Polygamist wedding? I wouldn't.
Now I'll admit I'm about as far away from a religious person or scholar as you can get, but if you can show me how serving a meal to a black or interracial family violates some type of religious belief, then we may have a different discussion. Not that I don't doubt many tried to claim that as justification.
I'll also add what I've said consistently on this issue. I personally think it's a stupid business decision for that baker and have no issue with people that don't agree with them protesting and exposing the fact that the baker refuses to do so.
|
(
In response to this post by southdenverhoo)
Posted: 09/06/2016 at 6:18PM