> Barrett questioned whether the First Amendment would still protect Smith if she wanted to decline to provide a "plug-and-play" website to a gay couple that a

> Barrett questioned whether the First Amendment would still protect Smith if she wanted to decline to provide a "plug-and-play" website to a gay couple that an opposite-sex couple could buy. This proves its about “speech” - plug-and-play is hardly the same level of speech as a unique design. More-specifically, there is a difference, legally, between “conduct” and “speech”. Eg. You can say discriminatory things, but you cannot do discriminatory things. So the question at hand.. what if you discriminate what you do, to avoid being compelled to say something you don’t want to. A Plug-and-play website might not pass the test when it comes to being “speech” the way unique artistic graphic might.