The Arizona bill is a hot topic (duh). This might bring out some heat against me. So be it. It’s not like that’s ever stopped me before
I support the idea that private business owners should be allowed to refuse to personally participate in a gay wedding if it violates his/her religious scruples.
Private business owners who’ve been involved in this kind of controversy before have refused specifically because it has to do with a gay wedding, not because they hate gay people (as some people have insinuated or have been led to believe).
Do you really think that someone would refuse to serve someone simply because he/she was gay? Even if someone truly was hateful, it is incredibly doubtful he/she would pass up the chance for business with someone. Money is money, no matter who spends it.
People should not be expected to drop their personal ethics at the door of their place of employment. The First Amendment was passed precisely to keep us free from that kind of unconscionable request.
“I can’t force a Jewish deli to provide me with non kosher meat. I can’t force a gay sign company to print me “Homosexual sex is a sin” banners (I’d probably be sued just for making the request). I can’t force a Muslim caterer to serve pork. I can’t force a pro-choice business to buy ad space on my website. I can’t force a Baptist sculptor to carve me a statue of the Virgin Mary (source).”
Private business owners should be allowed to deny service if they desire. If you do not agree that someone should deny service to gay people, let the market forces work against him/her. Suggesting that government should mandate a person to provide service for something to which he/she is ethically opposed is tyranny, even if you believe it is benevolent.