The plaintiff in the case, 303 Creative, creates websites for weddings. It is opposed to same-sex marriages. Therefore, it does not want to provide its services to gay couples who are seeking a wedding website. 303 Creative has sued to prevent the enforcement of Colorado's public accommodations law, which prohibits businesses that choose to serve the public from rejecting customers on the basis of race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation.

Mainstream-press commentators are couching the controversy in terms of freedom of speech, a right that is guaranteed by the First Amendment and, by incorporation, the Fourteenth Amendment. Undoubtedly, that's what the Supreme Court will do as well, once it issues its ruling.

In actuality, however, the case has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Instead, it is entirely based on another fundamental, natural, God-given right—the right of private property.

As the owner of its business, 303 Creative has the right to decide how to run its business any way it wants. If the business was owned by the state, that would be one thing. Or if it was owned by society, that would be another thing. But the business isn't owned by the state or by society. It's owned by 303 Creative. 

As the owner of the business, 303 Creative has the right to decide to whom it will provide services. It's not a question of 303 Creative's free-speech rights. It simply a matter of private ownership of property. It has the right to decide to whom it will provide services because it, not the state or society, owns the business.