The decision announced Tuesday comes after a U.S. Supreme Court victory this summer for a graphic artist who didn't want to design wedding websites for same-sex couples.
Interesting article. The twist this time is that the complainant only asked the baker to make a pink and blue cake. There is no mention of any words or overt imagery, as in previous cases. The baker refused to make the cake after being told by the complainant that the cake was intended to celebrate a gender transition.
While the complainant was definitely trolling the baker, I think she has a good chance of winning since the requested cake didn't involve any speech. The same cake made for a kids' birthday party would presumably have been okay. It is a brilliant move to out the bigot, and I hope it eventually ends up before SCOTUS.
Reminder that siding with the plaintiff is siding with slavery, which is defined asforced labor. We've already lost the thread when we ask questions like "Is the cake speech?". Unless we want to actively support slavery, we have to let people refuse to work for other people, without purity tests on said refusal.