​​Public accommodation laws and the requirement to serve a person who walks in the "doors" of a business to purchase an item or service does not permit the customer to demand that the owner or clerk act in a way that defiles their conscience. There is no law that the business owner is required to participate in, provide for, or accommodate the customers pursuit of life, liberty, or happiness.

Serving a human being, regardless of whether they are Black, White, Latino, Asian, Muslim, Jewish, LGBT, a murderer, or rapist does not require providing for or enhancing their moral or immoral, cultural or religious actions, beliefs or behaviors.

The decision to bake a cake for any celebration, action, or event, such as the "God hates fags convention," the "KKK/White Supremacists' convention," the gay orgy, the Gay/LGBT wedding, an Anti-Semitic gathering, or a Halloween or stripper party, etc., is only the Constitutional and unalienable right of the petitioned.​
A person’s orientations and desires may be classified as moral or immoral variously to various people, but orientations and desires provide no basis for discrimination in public businesses and accommodation requirements. However, when a request goes beyond purchasing a product to requesting that the business becomes a provider, enhancer, or supplier of a behavior, action, or event, then, according to Jefferson, the constitutional right to conscience becomes immediately effective over any and all civil authority!

Americans need to learn what our Constitutional freedoms are actually about rather than being forced into the slaughtering stall of emotional and false-fairness Constitutional atrocities.

There were rather absurd arguments of both sides of the SCOTUS oral arguments of the cake case on December 5, 2017. There were also ludicrous and un-Constitutional arguments and statements of the liberal justices!

No court has legal standing against a person's unalienable right to conscience. The Supreme Court is not God and the court did not grant us our unalienable rights. 

According to our constitution, the SCOTUS should recuse itself from any judgement in this and all similar cases of conscience, other than to uphold any unalienable right to conscience which is presented to it.

Not even the supreme court has the authority to decide what is permissible or not to an individuals right to conscience. 

8 JEFFERSONIAN PRINCIPLES ON BAKING CAKES (or any other acts of conscience).

1. "No provision in our constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority." --Thomas Jefferson to the New London Methodists, 1809. Me 16:33

In other words, the dearest, most precious, and most important thing in our Constitution to every American should be the right of the belief, conscience, and opinion of the individual, and the right to  express and act upon his or her beliefs.  The Government may make NO LAW, including any Civil Laws that might force an American Citizen to participate, enhance, support or provide for another persons  rights, beliefs and actions. Period. NO LAW!!!

2. Jefferson said..."our Constitution... Has not left the religion (thought or non-religious reason or conscience) of its citizens under the power of its public functionaries, were it possible that any of these should consider a conquest over the consciences of men either attainable or applicable to any desirable purpose." --Thomas Jefferson: reply to New London Methodists, 1809. Me 16:332

In other words, no law, or civil rights law, may take precedence over the right of conscience to participate or not participate in any action. The constitution gives only the individual the right and the power of their own conscience to dictate what actions they will participate in. 

3. Thomas Jefferson: "and thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the united states of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same, as this state, by a law passed on the general demand of its citizens, had already protected them from all human restraint or interference. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the constitution, which expressly declares, that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or protecting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press”: thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others." 

4. "It is inconsistent with the spirit of our laws and constitution to force tender consciences." --Thomas Jefferson: proclamation Concerning Paroles, 1781. Fe 2:430, papers 4:404

5. "The error seems not sufficiently eradicated that the operations of the mind as well as the acts of the body are subject to the coercion of the laws. But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others." --Thomas Jefferson: notes on Virginia Q. xvii, 1782. Me 2:221

(Nor is it injurious to say to another “you are sinning and i will not provide for, enable, or enhance your sinful event.” JSB)

6. "[The] liberty of speaking and writing... Guards our other liberties." --Thomas Jefferson: reply to Philadelphia democratic republicans, 1808. Me 16:304

7. "We are bound, you, i, and everyone to make common cause, even with error itself, to maintain the common right of freedom of conscience." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Dowse, 1803. Me 10:378

8. "That form [of self-government] which we have substituted [for that which bound men under the chains of monkish ignorance and superstition] restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion." –Thomas Jefferson to Roger C. Weightman, 1826. Me 16:182

Congress shall make no law hindering someone's right to religion, thought, opinion, or conscience. What part of "
no law" do those who would betray our Constitution not understand?  The "free exercise of religion" is not absurdly restricted to religious people or religion itself, but, as Jefferson points out, is about thought, opinion, philosophy, and conscience of the atheist and agnostic as well.

A gay baker cannot be forced to bake a cake for the Westboro Baptist church's "god hates fags convention."

A black baker cannot be forced to bake a cake or take pictures for the KKK/White supremacists’ convention.

A Christian baker does not have to bake cakes and desserts for a gay or straight orgy.  And no court can dictate the conscience requirement to participate in an orgy, a wedding, or a birthday party.

Although she may serve the general public, even a prostitute has the right to refuse service to a john.

The only person allowed to decide the moral labeling of any event is the person asked to attend, provide for, or serve the event.  No court, and no one else, has legal standing against a person's right to act according to their conscience.

Thank you, God, for inspiring Thomas Jefferson to address the issue of cake-conscience coercion 200 years ago!