The Portland Press Herald quotes Professor Michael McConnell on the possible civil rights implications of recent religious freedom laws.

What began 20 years ago as a bipartisan drive to protect the rights of people to follow their faith against an overbearing government erupted this week into a divisive dispute over gay rights and religious freedom.

And the fracture can be traced back to two recent moves by the Supreme Court that set up an unusual legal crosscurrent between liberals and conservatives.

…

Stanford Law professor Michael McConnell supports the religious freedom laws, but says their impact has been exaggerated.

“Businesses that have to serve all members of the public have to serve all members of the public,” he said. “That is the principle of public accommodation law.”

As examples, he cited taxis, phone companies, restaurants and hotels.

But he said some people might have a religious objection to providing certain services. “For example, I would think a Jewish wedding singer could legitimately refuse to sing in a church wedding. … For a photographer or other artist to refuse to apply her creative gift to a same-sex marriage ceremony is much the same. I cannot understand why any civil libertarian would want to force someone to participate in a ceremony they do not approve of.”