Colorado baker back in court over second LGBTQ bias allegation

[Demovictory9]

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/colorado-baker-back-court-over-second-lgbtq-bias-allegation-n949836

Colorado baker back in court over second LGBTQ bias allegation
Attorneys for Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips say he's being punished by the state for refusing to bake a cake celebrating a gender transition.

DENVER — Attorneys for a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple on religious grounds — a stand partially upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court — argued in federal court Tuesday that the state is punishing him again over his refusal to bake a cake celebrating a gender transition.

Lawyers for Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, are suing to try to stop the state from taking action against him over the new discrimination allegation. They say the state is treating Phillips with hostility because of his Christian faith and pressing a complaint that they call an "obvious setup."

"At this point, he's just a guy who is trying to get back to life. The problem is the state of Colorado won't let him," Jim Campbell, an attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, said after the hearing. The conservative Christian nonprofit law firm is representing Phillips.

State officials argued for the case to be dismissed, but the judge said he was inclined to let the case move forward and would issue a written ruling later.

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips discriminated against Denver attorney Autumn Scardina because she's transgender. Phillips' shop refused to make a cake last year that was blue on the outside and pink on the inside after Scardina revealed she wanted it to celebrate her transition from male to female.

She asked for the cake on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider Phillips' appeal of the previous commission ruling against him. In that 2012 case, he refused to make a wedding cake for same-sex couple Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins.

[mickswalkabout41]

1. Business owners

Have the right to refuse service to anyone. Consumers have a right to not darken the door and or do business with such owners. I have cut ties with several of these businesses and spend my money elsewhere. But we aren’t too far from white only drinking fountains. So where do we draw the line?//

[Cal Carpenter]

2. They have the right to refuse service to anyone, but not for any reason

If their refusal is due to a person's gender, nationality, religion, disability, race, then it is discrimination and they do not have the right to do that.

The question here is whether or not sexuality and gender identity are protected classes (in some states they are, but not federally). I know which side of the line I stand on.

On the other hand, as a business owner I can refuse service to someone in a swastika t-shirt, or who says something racist in my store. That's not discrimination; I am not refusing service because the person is white but because they are a bigoted asshole. Which is not a protected class, heh.