So if a floral shop refuses to serve a gay wedding, and the Supreme Court says it must, I get the tort.
But what’s the damage?
Does the shop have to pay for another shop to provide services? Makes no sense.
This is all bullcrap.
The state “Human Rights” commission wants to take her business and her house in fines and punishment. She is in her 70s.
Most people miss the point that the declining wedding merchant isn’t enriching himself by his actions, which might be suspect, but is IMPOVERISHING himself by turning down business. What is it he has to gain, except a clean conscience?