Yet another conservative who doesn’t understand how anti-discrimination laws work:

Frankly, RFRA’s balancing test is, if anything, only a mild protection. From the First Amendment alone, we should understand (in my opinion) that the nation’s traditions of religious freedom should protect the right of a traditional Christian baker not to make a cake for a same-sex marriage. It should protect the right of a Muslim baker not to provide unleavened bread for a Jewish seder. It should protect the right of a homosexual photographer to decline to take photos of a married couple standing under a Biblical inscription about marriage being between man and woman. It should protect the right of a Jewish deli owner to deny services to a Muslim hungry from a demonstration march where the Muslim held aloft a sign saying “Death to Israel and Jews.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/416233/mike-pence-caved-quin-hillyer

No law says you have to serve someone who threatens you. If the Deli owner refused to serve this guy, but served other Muslims, then no problem. If he refuses to serve any Muslim, that’s discrimination.

Also, trying to wrap my head around the second example. Why would any baker produce unleavened bread for and not sell it to Jews. I mean there are very specific kosher regulations on how Passover Matzo is made. This hypothetical Muslim baker would have had to have gone through the Kosher certification process, and then produced matzo specifically for the purpose of not selling it to Jews. That’s a lot of work just to be a dick.