That misses the point. You’re not discriminating against the person. They would make them a birthday cake or sell them anything currently in the store. This issue is forcing the baker to engage in a contract to create something for an even which they have a conscientious objection to based on religious beliefs. They’re discriminating which EVENTS they want to be a part of. Just because a gay man asks doesn’t mean there was discrimination against his protected class, the request could come from a wedding planner - the answer would be the same.
For the State to force them into such a contract is nothing more than compelled speech, coerced speech, forced servitude, etc.. - with the threat of financially (or worse) destroying them if they do not comply. That is tyranny, pure and simple.
Good illustration of the underlying point.
Yes you are right. But I think it is even simpler than that. The reason doesn’t matter. Religious objection to me is besides the point. To me it is simple age old common law. Two people must willingly enter into a contract. The reason one party doesn’t wish to enter into a contract is irrelevant.
Putting a cake on the shelf of a public establishment is “an offer for sale” and the terms are usually posted such as hours of operation and which forms of payment they accept. The second someone walks in and says “I’ll buy it” the offer is accepted and the contract is done.
But open to the public does not mean you have to accommodate any special request any member of the public asks. There could be 15 reasons why the baker refuses to make a specific cake. It is silly to even argue the question that his refusal is based on hatred or religion or any other issue. He cannot be compelled, period.
And it seems some liberal recording "artists" forbid Republicans from using their songs, refusing to grant them license to do so.