...and it seems to me that mmoffitt has nowhere effectively refuted the rather obvious argument that the baker should then be entitled to refuse to provide a cake for, say, an interracial wedding on religious grounds. Indeed, had the Arizona law under consideration been framed in these terms, I can't help feeling that mmoffitt would never have risen in its defense. Seems to me that the sexual element in the present instance has particularly irritated him. Why is this, does anyone suppose?
cordially,