People surely have a right not to participate in any activity which goes against their religious beliefs. Certainly ministers of religion must be free to decide whether to officiate at a gay wedding or to offer their churches. After that, things get very grey indeed.
They are big on free speech and religious freedom in the United States and, because of the past treatment of blacks, sensitive and resistant to all forms of discrimination. However, they face the same dilemma that all tolerant democracies face — as we did in reconsidering Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act — which is to craft a balance between upholding individual freedoms on the one hand and rejecting discrimination on the other.
Recent events in the small town of Walkerton in Indiana illustrate the dilemma. The facts of the case have been in the news but, briefly, they are as follows: Indiana was in process of passing a religious freedom law not too different from a similar federal law signed by Bill Clinton and laws in place in most other US states. The law basically gives individuals and businesses a legal fallback (a better chance in court) if they object to being compelled by the government to do something against their religious beliefs.