I posted this on another thread and nobody disputed it:
The legalization of gay marriage gave homosexual people the right to marry each other over the objections of both the religious, and non-religious, who believe that marriage should remain as it has throughout human history, as the joining of one man, to one woman. Having that right to marry, should not be a licence to force the participation of those who in doing so, would violate the tenets of their religion. In other words, the obtaining of a right by one group, shouldn't result in the sacrificing of a right by another group.
But there's more...
A gay couple having a formal ceremony with food, a photographer, a cake, music, etc... is a 100% optional activity and totally unnecessary to exercise their right to become a legally married gay couple. How can anyone justify that a person be legally compelled to defy their religious beliefs and participate in an event/ceremony that has no effect what so ever on the rights of gay people to wed?
It's clear that choosing not to cater to a gay wedding based on religious grounds, is not discrimination against gay people, but discrimination against a ceremony that has been deemed sacrilegious for thousands of years. Laws have been passed so that nobodys religious rights can infringe on a homosexual's right to engage in a same-sex marriage, so why shouldn't there be laws passed that assure that a homosexuals rights to wed, doesn't infringe on anyones religious rights and beliefs?
Isn't that not only fair, but the way it should be?