ms. severino. guest: that is an argument we hear a lot, but one that the court rejected in hobby lobby. people can have their beliefs, but once you go to the market system you have to go by the public orthodoxy. that is not something the supreme court accepted. our founders understood freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to do everything you want with your doors closed or in your church or synagogue at a service. it means you can actually live by those beliefs, and that is why so many relays expression cases don't have to do with what you do what your house of worship, but how you live your life. that is what is at stake here. host: duane is next. mississippi. caller: this is a slippery slope. i am thinking if you are a baker, and you do not want to make cakes -- this particular cake baker, you have to use them and you cannot use another cake baker? let me ask you this here also. if you work in a hospital and you don't want to do abortions, will the law change and make a doctor perform a

ms. severino? guest: there are people trying to eliminate these boards across -- conscience protections across the board. we are supposed to be a live and let live society. there are practically speaking, a lot of other bakers that are happy to, excited about making cakes at this wedding. in this case they were able to get a rainbow-flagged designed cake. i think it was even donated. this is not something that says this is the message we do not want to proclaim. there are lots of different bakers. the same thing is coming into play decidedly in the health care sphere. we have to have the flexibility to have a society that appreciates religious beliefs. we are a large and varied culture. there are going to be a lot of other people that are willing to perform -- whether it is the abortion, make the cake, or other things. you don't have to force or commandeer someone to do it. say i will run over your religious leaves to get what i want. host: isn't that a craft in itself? couldn't they apply the same

ms. severino.t: i want to point out some of the fallacy. to serveot in refusing the based on who they are. if he would say i am not going to serve any same-sex couple. pat is not what he is saint he says i'm going to make a cake that celebrates a same-sex wedding -- saying. he says i'm not going to make a cake that celebrates a same-sex wedding. think of the expression if your parents that i am not attending your wedding -- it is sending a message. it is celebrating it. they do not have to have a cake that says same-sex marriage forever for it to be expressive, but i do think this is a very different thing from not refusing everyone. he is happy to sell as many -- many kind of cakes. he does refuse to make cakes that have come for the upcoming a bachelorette party theme or something. couple in question is heading into the supreme court. ms. severino, go ahead. he refuses other types of messages. it is about this issue of the message, and a wedding cake is sending a message of celebrating the messag