and what MORAL right does an activist have to insist that the baker violate his Christian principles ?. this was a contest between religious rights and homosexual demands , and on this occasion the latter won in law. I do not dispute that. that does not deny us the right to say the verdict was nonsense, and unjust. the homosexual man would seem to have gone into a known Christian bakers , probably knowing that it would violate their principles if they printed his message that promotes the redefinition of marriage. whether his feelings were hurt or not, I know not. but it is my opinion fwiw, that it is the christians who are being persecuted here, not the homosexual. there is no evidence of persecution or bigotry, other than that the proprietors adhere, as best they can, to what they read in the bible. any other order by anyone whatever their sexual activity would not have been refused and I suspect that when the order was declined, there was no evidence of any animosity on their part. one things for sure...you could not accuse the complainant of being thick skinned !.