> Let's be clear, that is not the request.

Yes, it was the request. They wanted a custom cake celebrating a gay wedding, which was precluded by the baker's sincere religious belief.

If you read TFA I linked to, you would have read this as well as all the other insane requests refused, and that the baker was willing to sell otherwise made cakes.

This is a well litigated, well reported case and you have twice now insisted material elements of the case did not happen.

This is not about refusing someone based on their immutable attributes, but their requested content. Stop asking rhetorical questions regarding racism.

Sincere religious belief isn't a bulletproof defense on these matters though.

It is as relates to compelling someone to create custom content on your behalf, to express your views.

I can't use a religious belief to refuse a rote service, but I can to refuse bespoke work that expresses your views.

This case was never about refusing service to LGBT couples, it was about refusing bespoke work. To paint it as anything else, and in defense of your argument that "Conservatives are anti-LGBT" because of this case is wrong and nothing short of propaganda.

By your logic, business should be able to deny business involving bespoke imagery of interracial couples based on religious views. For instance, a cake depicting the couple.

Just like a baker can refuse to create a White Power cake covered in swastikas based on their sincerely held views!

This is another false equivalency.

White supremacy is on a lower tier of protection in America than things like race and sexual orientation.

"Bespoke work" that is colored by the nature of the customer requesting the work. Does the baker do wedding cakes? Yes. Now what if the customer requested a wedding cake, but the wedding is a gay wedding? Suddenly no.

Your argument that the baker was merely refusing to serve the customer because of the "content" does not hold up.