There is nothing in the First Amendment that has one damns thing to do with wedding cakes.
This isn't about wedding cakes, Dr Deflection. This is about not forcing religious owners to perform functions that are counter their religious principles, which would include forcing them to cater weddings for a gay themed event, when there's a vast number of perfectly secular private owners. It doesn't have to be cakes, or even edible items. That's a clear deflection effort to try and make it about the end product
And the tangent that arose from this premise, is the suggestion proposed by the clergyman, that these owners should go right ahead and accept such functions, do it with a smile, all while wearing your cross, and have a nice bible verse sewn onto the uniform. Then take those profits, and publically acknowledge that the profits gained from the function would be donated in the name of that gay themed function towards a nice respectable pro-family organization.
