Butch, would you be okay with an ex-customer standing outside your chop shop holding a placard which reads "THIS SHOP SELLS OVERPRICED ROTTEN MEAT", if the ex-customer sincerely believed that to be true, then it would be okay would it not?

"Would he also refuse to bake wedding cakes for those having their second or third hetero weddings - considering divorce is not permitted in certain religions, or cakes for Bar Mitzvahs as well?"

Why would he? His beef was with homosexual "marriage"' not a list you make up. You are clearly running out of silly things to say.

If someone held up sign outside a butcher shop claiming that the butcher sold rotten meat, the butcher would sue them for defamation and win, unless he was actually selling rotten meat. Some posters don't have to try very hard at all to prove that they are stupid.

ttbn,

The point of a hypothetical is really lost on you, isn't it?

Why would he?

Well, where second and third marriages are concerned, the clue was right there in the comment you quoted: because divorce is a sin.

I doubt he would refuse to bake a cake for a second or third marriage, though, and if this is the case, then it is yet another example of the hypocrisy in this whole sorry saga.

ttbn, I asked Butch if he would be okay with that, not if he would sue. That would indicate he is not okay with it. You can't answer the question for Butch. Some posters don't have to try very hard at all to prove that they are stupid.

Dear Rache,

«Davis was a government employee who refused to carry out her legal duty and the obligations of her employment.»

She was in the wrong and could be sacked for it.

«The next step would be supermaket checkout operators who refuse to scan your pork or shellfish products.»

If they accepted the job, then they too were in the wrong. However, it would also be wrong for centrelink to stop their pension if they refused to take such jobs to begin with.

«customers would prefer not to waste their time going into a shop and being refused service and possibly publicly humiliated.»

Wait: "Refused service" is legitimate, but not "humiliated"? The latter is legitimate only if the sign on the door reads "sado-masochistic club".

«If the owner sincerely holds those beliefs, why not display them with pride?»

Why with pride? Why not with humility?

«Would he also refuse to bake wedding cakes for those having their second or third hetero weddings»

I wouldn't advise it (nor to refuse SSM-cakes to begin with) - but that's his business, not mine or yours.

«He's entitled to his personal bigotry but potential customers are entitled to know what sort of person they are doing business with.»

They are only entitled to know all about the goods and services on offer as well as the quality of service, rather than about the person. No signs can convey the latter anyway.

---

Dear Paul,

«would you be okay with an ex-customer standing outside your chop shop holding a placard which reads "THIS SHOP SELLS OVERPRICED ROTTEN MEAT"»

As long as they don't demand wages... This could boost the sales (curiosity, you know), especially if the ex-customer was a young lady in bikini!