Where should there be "The right to refuse service"?

The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."In addition to the protections against discrimination provided under federal law, many states have passed their own Civil Rights Acts that provide broader protections than the Federal Civil Rights Act. For example, California's Unruh Civil Rights Act makes it illegal to discriminate against individuals based on unconventional dress or sexual preference.In the 1960s, the Unruh Civil Rights Act was interpreted to provide broad protection from arbitrary discrimination by business owners. Cases decided during that era held that business owners could not discriminate, for example, against hippies, police officers, homosexuals, or Republicans, solely because of who they were.In cases in which the patron is not a member of a federally protected class, the question generally turns on whether the business's refusal of service was arbitrary, or whether the business had a specific interest in refusing service. For example, in a recent case, a California court decided that a motorcycle club had no discrimination claim against a sports bar that had denied members admission to the bar because they refused to remove their "colors," or patches, which signified club membership. The court held that the refusal of service was not based on the club members' unconventional dress, but was to protect a legitimate business interest in preventing fights between rival club members.

Why just faith? Is faith more important than secular principles? If I don't want to serve Jews because I think they are part of a conspiracy to bankrupt America/wherever then why is that belief, should it be sincerely held, not to be permitted but 'I believe some anonymous and long dead jews were told this by the creator of the universe' is?

And I too was careful to include the phrase 'even if its only in certain contexts'. For instance refusing to sell a cake for a gay wedding is refusing a certain class of people, only in certain contexts. If you'd like instead of Jews being responsible for bankrupting us, you can replace it with 'people wearing yarmulkes'.

No. We're defending a form of government which prevents your minority from tyranizing other minorities.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

I think Faith may have made o good point somewhere upthread when she suggested that it was a matter of denying a particular service rather than a particular group or individual.

Should a person have the right to deny a specific service that is offensive as long as it doesn't extend into areas of general services that would exclude individuals.

For example, if a member of the KKK came in and wanted you to bake a cake for their rally that said "We hate *****", you should be free to respond, "I don't provide that service (making cakes that promote hatred and bigotry). However, I do bake cakes, so I can bake a cake with no inscription on it and you can write whatever you want on it."Could this same response be made to a same sex couple who want a wedding cake? "I don't provide that service (same sex wedding cakes) but I do bake wedding cakes. I can make you a wedding cake and sell you two sets of bride/groom cake toppers and you can put them on yourself."

How would those two situations be different?Would that be enough to ease the conscious of the person who doesn't support same-sex marriage?