The problem with most discussions about religious freedom is it is always explained through a selfish perspective. Here, check it out: If I'm in a gay couple and no one in town will bake me a wedding cake because it's against their religion, should I be able to sue? If I'm in a mixed-race couple and no one will officiate my ceremony because it's against their religion, are they interfering with MY religious freedom? The answer is yes. It's crystal clear. A merchant cannot refuse service to someone for their religion, their skin color, their sexual persuasion or any other constitionally-protected belief or trait. This is because majorities can become instruments of tyranny. If every lecturer at the University of Alabama decides it violates their religious freedom to educate black students, every lecturer at the University of Alabama is putting their religious freedom above the right to education held by those students. We rolled the National Guard for that. As with most things, your right to religious freedom and my right to religious freedom have to balance out. "Go find another preacher," you say. "Not all preachers will refuse to marry you." But that's how prejudice works - someone stands up for oppression and everyone else oppressive rallies behind them. This is how pogroms start. This drives the Jews out of Europe. This sends the Chinese back to the mainland after the railroads are built. If there is no mechanism protecting the liberties of the minority, the majority will abuse them. You have a game. It has rules. No one is being forced to play the game and it is 100% voluntary. But it's NOT 100% voluntary for people you don't want to play the game because your god isn't big enough for them. That's what equality is about: knowing you can't legally be told you aren't allowed to play. You know what you just defended? The "separate but equal" clause. You just backed up against Apartheid. That should give you pause. It really comes down to this: religion should not and does not give you permission to treat one person as less of a human than any other. And by saying "my religious freedom does not require me to assist you in practicing your constitutional rights" you are arguing that certain people are beneath the law... ...and certain people are above. And you're not. "Religious freedom" can mean undertaking something spiritually odious so that everyone in your society can belong.If I'm a baker and choose not to make a cake for a gay wedding, should I be sued, fined, or put out of business? If I'm a minister, should I be forced to marry a gay couple?
