[Sarcazmo]

That’s what she asked?

I though this chick was supposed to be smart?

[Boogieman]

It’s actually quite a good question considering the point of contention.

The law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. ACB’s question demonstrates that the real discrimination happening here is not based on sexual orientation, but based on the message that people want to promote on their website. By showing that the web designer would discriminate about all different kinds of messages they disagree with, it makes it hard to argue that their stance is just some “backdoor” method of discriminating based on sexual orientation.

[Republican Wildcat]

That’s what she asked? I though this chick was supposed to be smart?

A very simple, yet brilliant question that cut to the fact the premise of what is being alleged against the litigant was bogus. Cut right to the heart of the case.