So, I invite everyone to read all of the mainstream media articles.
Then come back to this.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Now, here goes the "facts you might not have heard" ...
I hope this makes it to the US Supreme Court, because it'll be 9-0 in his favor.
Then come back to this.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Now, here goes the "facts you might not have heard" ...
- The Baker is suing the state, not vice-versa
- The Baker wants a permanent injunction against the state
- The state has consistently told the Baker he must settle consumer complaints in arbitration
- The 'straw that broke the camel's back' was this one ...
- A consumer wanted a cake to celebrate their sex change
- Refused to admit whether or not they asked for a message in the complaint
- Refused to admit whether or not they had asked for other cakes to be baked prior
- Did not deny they had previously tried to get the baker to bake a satanic cake ... more than once!
- ^ This is the type of person the state of Colorado says the baker must go into arbitration with (because they dropped their lawsuit after finding these things out)
I hope this makes it to the US Supreme Court, because it'll be 9-0 in his favor.