"What if someone's personal morals tell them it's okay hurt someone?"
I literally said in the next sentence that it was not ok to hurt someone physically.
"Only physically? So if he harms someone in other ways it's fine?"
The concept of rights is that you can do what you want as long as you are not taking away another person's rights. So, If you're referring to emotionally hurting someone, then yes, it is fine because you don't, and can't have a right to "not be offended." If you are referring to something else, then you will have to spell it out for me.
"I also believe that if someone is going to turn away customers they disagree with, they need to reconsider owning a private business"
So you think Facebook and Twitter should reconsider having a business because they ban people? That is "turning away customers they disagree with." Are you going to mention the ToS to protect that argument? Jack Philips' ToS was he refused to violate his own morals in his cake designs.
"Don't be a bigot, then turn around and complain when you face consequences for being a bigot"
So the consequences of his actions, which you admitted he had the right to do, is to be continuously legally harassed by people? If you believe that it is ok to abuse the government services, that are meant to address legal wrongs, to try and force people to work against their will, then you don't believe in rights. You just believe in forcing your beliefs on others.
If, by consequences, you meant they wouldn't shop there, then we agree. That's all they had to do, pick another baker.
Instead they chose to use the legal system to harass him. The Supreme Court even found, in their ruling, that the Colorado government had demonstrated overt "religious animus" against him.
1. What I think is morally right for his decisions is irrelevant. It is his morals that guide his actions. The only time I, or we, should get a say is if he physically harms someone.
2. My question is a reframe of your second one. My question is my answer. Do YOU believe that someone should be able to force someone to work unwillingly for them?
No. He refused to make a specific cake for them. They could have purchased any of the cakes that were already made. That is an important difference. He did not refuse to serve them, he just would not make a cake that specifically celebrated their marriage.
I used whites and Christians as an example, and you are correct, its not on the same scale. I'm more concerned about the trend, because it is going in that direction. The baker in Colorado, who did NOT refuse to sell the gay couple a cake, if you look at the facts, is still being harassed by the government based on his religious beliefs (another example). There are people being attacked as "nazis" for simply saying that America is not systemically racist (another example). The Left is actively promoting a totalitarian society (my main point). Because I see the Left as the main problem today, I'm calling them out. If I were living during the McCarthy era, I would be calling him and his supporters out for the same reasons.