“Likewise a Christian baker has the right not to bake any cake he doesn’t want to bake, just as a gay night-club has the right to refuse service to a straight couple if it chooses.”
Years ago I taught civil rights to new-hires as part of an on-boarding process for a fortune 100 company. Normally, I would open by posing two questions. First, I would ask for a show of hands as to who believed that “freedom of choice” was a basic and essential human right. Invariably, everyone in the class would raise their hand. Then I would ask for a show of hands regarding who believed that “discrimination” was an unacceptable social injustice. Just as invariably, all hands go up but then a few would be timidly withdrawn as they realized the inherent conflict between their two beliefs. In neither case did I identify the object of choice or discrimination, yet there was never hesitation regarding the reaction. Aside from revealing how the word used, rather than its meaning, unconsciously influenced perception, the point was also to show that each time a behavior was disallowed because it constituted “discrimination” (an inherent social injustice) that it also extinguished “freedom of choice” (a basic and essential human right) and so should only be undertaken with the utmost circumspection and never impulsively.