If all you can do is accuse the judge of being liberal, you have no argument.Like I said a liberal Judge.
He's not being punished. he is being prevented from discrimination.To punish a man for refusing to use his talents to support of “gay marriage” absolutely infringed upon his right.
There is no right to discriminate or deny service on the basis of a potential client's beliefs.As does your reaction, but not a surprise as most like yourself are for the removal of liberty in favor of your agenda.
No, he is denying service on the basis of sexuality, which is illegal in Colorado.All he is doing is choosing not to support “gay marriage” with his talents.
The baker has no interest in what the product or service is used for, that is none of his business.I agree with you with the exception of products and services that deal with marriage. It is wrong for government to force anyone (including a gay couple who would choose to only provide “gay wedding” cakes for only gay couples) to use their talents in support of something that can’t support or believe in.
He denies them service. That is doing something.He literally did NOTHING to the gay couple.
How was his free exercise prohibited. Be specific.“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
You keep parroting this, but don't seem to understand what it means. They cannot force clients to abide by their religious moral views in order to obtain service. to do so infringes upon the free exercise of the client.“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” They can refuse to haul anything if it goes against their belief and it’s not up to you or government to force them to do otherwise.
No, it isn't. The court addressed this argument directly, and correctly rebutted it.His wedding cake at a “gay wedding” is absolutely a government forced adornment and unconstitutional.
No, he is being prevented from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.The subject is a wedding cake and a baked being forced by government to use his talents to support “gay marriage”
Nor does it change the fact that you have presented no facts, only opinion.Insults don’t change the facts.
You still don't appear to understand what this means.“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
Is that the best you can do? The judge was liberal? You don't seem to have a valid argument in defense of your position.Again the liberal judge is wrong, and if “gay marriage” does come to Colorado against the Colorado Constitutional Amendment, then you will need to figure out how to let those who deal in the wedding industry have Liberty.
No, they are addressing the fact that he broke the law by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.Government is punishing him for his belief in traditional marriage by forcing him to use his talents in support of “gay marriage”.
Think about what you have just said for a moment. There have been numerous cases where businesses have discriminated against homosexuals, been sued, and lost. These cases have been tried in different states, by different judges, with different backgrounds, yet they all keep arriving at the same conclusion, which would tend to indicate that your theory of judicial bias is incorrect.It’s not the arguments it the bias of the judge.