The ACLU supports religious rights unless they impose harm or discriminate against others, Melling said. The denial of services is “the kind of discrimination we don’t sanction."The Alliance Defending Freedom said the issue involves the personal freedom of store owners who refuse to provide a service because it would violate their religious beliefs.

In some cases, these types of circumstances are already allowed under discrimination laws, and you don’t need to do anything. In other cases, you’ll need to apply for an exemption under either state or territory or Commonwealth laws.

“It is now crucial that as a country we protect religious freedom and the right of conscience and also not discriminate,” he said. But business owners who have exercised their religious freedom as guaranteed by such laws have come under public scrutiny.

About two-thirds of surveyed companies do not have policies protecting LGBT employees. Those that do have such policies say they were put in place because all customers and employees should be treated equally, because it’s the right thing to do, and because it makes it easier to attract and retain workers.

About six in 10 of those polled believe they and their colleagues should not be able to fire or refuse to hire LGBT people based on their religious beliefs, and eight in 10 support a federal law banning such discrimination. (Currently, federal law does not protect employees against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.)

According to a Small Business Majority poll released on Monday, two-thirds of US small businesses say owners should not be able to deny goods or services to LGBT customers. And about 55% of the 500 businesses surveyed said owners should not be allowed to deny wedding-related services. Additionally, about 55% of owners who identified as Republican and 62% of those who identified as Christian also opposed denying goods or services. This is not the first time a majority of small-business owners has expressed opposition to discrimination against LGBT customers through religious freedom laws. In April, 53% said they would not support such laws in their states, according to a Manta poll. (The Small Business Majority poll was also conducted in April.)

Thanks to the supreme court, same-sex marriage is now legal in all 50 states. But there are some states where small businesses, based on the religious beliefs of their owners, can refuse services to same-sex couples. While many Republican politicians defend the right to do so, a majority of small-business owners do not believe same-sex couples and other LGBT customers should be denied services based on such beliefs.

Many employers, especially large employers, have protections against discrimination for their workers. But without those company policies, or a labor contract, there is little legal recourse for an LGBT worker who has been fired or denied a job. In fact, an LGBT worker can still be fired by a company that's based in a state with non-discrimination laws, if that individual works in a state without those legal protections. "Is discrimination as frequent as was racial discrimination in the Jim Crow era? I don't think so. But it's not difficult to find victims of LBGT discrimination today," said Sam Marcosson, law professor at the University of Louisville.

"If there has not been a wave of firings or evictions in those states, it's partly because people are staying in the closet in those parts of the country," said Stephen Clark, a professor at Albany Law School. "You can't do that if you get married. It's a public act that creates a public record. Even if you don't publish a notice in the paper or invite people, you are running a risk." Advocates for gay rights say Friday's court decision makes it more necessary than ever to pass federal protections against LGBT discrimination. But such legislation remains stalled in Congress.

"In many states today it is legal for same sex couples to get married but to then be fired for getting married," she said. Only 21 states have laws banning companies from discriminating against employees based on sexual preference. And two of those states still allow a transgender worker to be fired or denied a job.

About 10% of 662 lesbian, gay and bisexual workers who were randomly surveyed said they have been fired within the last five years due to their sexual preference, according to Laura Durso, director of LGBT Progress campaign at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. And 26% of 6,450 transgender workers who participated in a non-random survey say they've been fired.

In most states their employers can fire them. Their landlords can evict them. They can also be denied service by hotels, restaurants and other businesses. They can even be denied credit and excluded from juries. "Today's decision is historic, no doubt about it. But it does not end discrimination against many LGBT people," said Adam Talbot, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT rights group.

Nearly half, or 47 percent of the survey participants identified themselves as Republican, 33 percent said they were Democrats and 19 percent said they were independent. But the majority of companies — two-thirds — said they had no policy in their companies protecting LGBT employees from discrimination. Of those that do have a policy, 64 said they created it because all customers and employees should be treated fairly and equally. Sixty percent said creating such a policy is the right thing to do, and about 40 percent said having a policy makes it easier to attract and retain good workers and draw more customers.

A majority of the survey participants said they support laws that give additional protection for LGBT people; 80 percent support a federal law to prohibit discrimination against LGBT individuals in restaurants, hotels and other businesses that are open to the public. Eighty-one percent said they're in favor of a federal law that prohibits employment discrimination that's based on the sexual orientation or gender identity of a worker or job applicant. Federal law currently doesn't give the same protection against employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity as it does against discrimination based on gender, age, race, religion or disability.

A majority of small business owners believe companies shouldn't be allowed to withhold goods or services from lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people based on an owner's religious beliefs, according to a survey released Monday. Two-thirds of the owners questioned in the survey by the advocacy group Small Business Majority said businesses shouldn't be able to refuse to provide goods or services to LGBT customers. Fifty-five percent said businesses shouldn't be allowed to deny wedding-related services to same-sex couples because of an owner's beliefs.

The Small Business Majority survey, which was a scientific poll, also showed support for providing service to the LGBT community. The poll of 500 small business owners found that nearly 60 percent of respondents said they opposed laws that would allow individuals, associations and businesses to legally refuse service to anyone based on religious beliefs. Only about 20 percent said they would strongly favor such laws. The poll also found that 80 percent of small-business owners said they would support a federal law banning discrimination against LGBT people in public accommodations, which include restaurants, hotels and other businesses open to the public.

The survey found that 65 percent of small businesses in the retail and service industries oppose denying services to LGBT individuals, even for wedding-related service. The Small Business Majority, which has 40,000 members, was among the groups that commissioned the survey. Interviews The Plain Dealer conducted this week with business owners, including those in the wedding industry, suggest that most of these entrepreneurs don't want to deny service to LGBT customers.

Supporters of the fine were outraged that any business owner would want to discriminate against potential customers based on sexual orientation. Opponents of the fine were outraged that entrepreneurs could face public scrutiny, or even have to pay huge damages, by practicing their religion. But there is little evidence supporting that small-business owners are split about wanting to deny service to LGBT customers. In fact, most business owners believe such customers should not be denied service, according to a national poll released Monday.

When you’re acting in a way that is intended to reduce a disadvantage experienced by people with an attribute that is covered under the law. For example, providing specialised counselling services only for young people or specialised health services for women. When factual evidence supports that the discrimination is reasonable in the circumstances. For example, where an insurance company can show that a refusal to provide a policy to a person is based on statistics or actuarial data which is reasonable for the company to rely on.

Today, a majority of states in the U.S. have marriage equality, but in some states it’s getting harder for LGBT people to go about their lives. In a growing number of places around the country, businesses run by people who morally object to homosexuality are attempting to deny services to same-sex couples and even individual non-straight people. Many pieces of legislation protecting this bigoted behavior have come through state congresses, and recently Indiana was the latest to make such a bill into the law of the land. The fight for LGBT rights has enjoyed victory after victory in the past few years, though there are still many challenges ahead. Losing in the sphere of marriage, opponents of equal treatment for all non-heterosexual people have recently turned their attention to other discriminatory efforts. The contested right to deny non-straight people service stems from what are known as religious exemption laws.

Classically, religious exemptions are intended to protect the livelihoods of employees whose religious practices may interfere with work. For example, if an employee’s prayer schedule overlaps with his or her work schedule, it is illegal to fire them for praying instead of working. In most states, religious exemptions require the employee and the employer to find a workaround to accommodate the religious practice, like creating an alternative work schedule. But denying services to customers for religious reasons is an entirely different subject. The law passed in Indiana this month and similar laws in other states aren’t intended to protect people from discrimination, but to legalize certain kinds of discrimination. There is no substantive difference between denying someone service because they are gay and denying someone service because they are black. And yet our constitutional law hasn’t caught up with this line of thinking. The landmark Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees full and equal access to goods, services, and facilities without discrimination or segregation based on race, color, religion, or nationality. Sexual identity is conspicuously missing from that list of protections, which is the loophole that anti-LGBT activists are using to justify the new religious exemption laws.

“As with an interracial couple, imposing such burdens on a same-sex couple would burden, demean, and stigmatize the couple in a manner that violates the Constitution and other laws. Thus, allowing accommodations in these circumstances would subject government entities and officials to legal liability,” asserts the AU document.  Said Americans United Senior Litigation Counsel Gregory M. Lipper: “The Supreme Court meant what it said. Any same-sex couple denied service by a government official should contact Americans United’s legal department. We stand ready to represent same-sex couples whose rights are violated on account of religion.”

Government employees who oppose marriage equality because of their religious beliefs are not entitled to refuse service to same-sex couples, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has informed officials in all 50 states today. In a letter released today, which will be sent to all state attorneys general as well as county clerks in Texas and South Dakota, Americans United explains that with marriage equality now the law of the land, government employees do not have the right to opt out of serving gay couples, because doing so would harm those couples and violate their constitutional rights. 

“Creating licenses to discriminate is a very dangerous path for America to go back down," said Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry. "Fifty years ago, businesses were allowed to refuse to serve people based on their skin color, and as a nation, we decided that was wrong. Treating people differently based on who they are is discrimination.”

here is strong support for gay marriage in the United States, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll, but there is even stronger support for allowing businesses to deny services to same-sex couples on religious grounds.Americans favor same-sex marriage by 44% to 39%, with 15% having no opinion, according to the poll published Thursday. It also found that 57% of respondents said they favored a religious exemption, and 39% said they were opposed. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Considered by the beef industry to be an impressive innovation, lean finely textured beef is made from the remnant scraps of cattle carcasses that were once deemed too fatty to go into human food. The scraps are heated and centrifuged to reclaim bits of muscle and then the product is treated with ammonium hydroxide to kill bacteria like Salmonella and E. coli before being mixed into ground beef. Currently, USDA allows these beef products to contain up to 15 percent lean finely textured beef without labeling requirements, but last year the department said it would allow voluntary labeling

But new government data show schools in four more states have since put aside concerns and resumed buying the controversial product.