Master Piece Cakeshop V. Colorado Supreme Court Case

Over the past few months on my social media feed, I've seen some of my LBGTQ friends posting things such as their partner and themselves are planning on getting married within the next coming months or x amount of months or years being with each other. Just recently in the news, probably not televised on the main stream news networks, there is a Supreme Court case down in Colorado. The case name is Master Piece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
The religious aspect that this Supreme Court case has screaming right away is the actions of Mr. Philips decision in which "pits religious believers against the nonreligious". Mr. Philips denied making a cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins which caused controversy within the state of Colorado. This case as well is brining many other issues to light that are not being publicly mentioned as for this case is, yet nevertheless its stirring the melting pot in America that in not all cases should the government rules and regulations should be followed to the bullet points. Such as the findings founded in the "Lavender Scare" in which founded and called homosexuals in work settings publicly and shunned them. It was founded as well in President Carters staff

and as he mentioned on behalf of homosexuals on his staff "As President...I believe I should represent everyone"(Dowland) when he was asked why he allowed homosexuals to be on his staff.
As you would have figured many religious affiliations stepped in to make their voices heard on either behalf of Mr.

Philips or Charlie and David. Protestants mentioned and find under their findings of Colorado's public accommodation law that that "Colorado's antidiscrimination law at issue in Masterpiece Cakeshop already exempts places that are “principally used for religious purposes” from its definition of a place of public accommodation." Which entails that Mr. Philips has the right to decline providing services no matter the couples background. Few other religious background such as "Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Jewish Commission on Law and Public Affairs" and few others argue the same point that Mr. Philips decision was morally

correct.
It is unfortunate this couple was denied services from this baker, however I for see that some other baker would decide to step in and either bake a cake for them or allow them to buy a cake. With some states recently allowing gay marriages would the other states follow suit? Who knows, as well frankly who knows their states rules and regulations. United States v. Windsor (2013) explains that "No matter how genuine the conviction of those who would deny them that right, for a same-sex couple seeking to celebrate the most special day in their life, not knowing whether a vendor will reject their business because of their sexual orientation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects” that this is a part of life. Craig and Mullins did not know when they entered the bakery to ask the baker to bake them a cake or buy a premade cake that he would deny it because they were a gay couple. Frankly you won't know when you get into your car that on the way to work that day you would get into a crash, or get pulled over by a cop. Yet again its sad to see a couple on their special day or days leading up to it getting denied services yet as Americans would do when getting knocked down is simply get back up, and for this case find another baker who would either bake them cake or allow them to buy a premade while maybe trying to sue the previous baker as well.