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

On which basis any belief based action can be justified.I know what God's will is and intend to obey it no matter what the law says and no matter what any of you think - Says the person who flies a plane into a skyscraper.I know what God's will is and intend to obey it no matter what the law says and no matter what any of you think - Says the person who decides to brutally kill prostitutes.And so on. These are things that have actually been done on the basis of knowing God's will.For obvious reasons neither the law nor society can simply accept knowing God's will as the justification for people doing things.

Those who flew planes into skyscrapers or killed prostitutes in the name of God's will could equally say that "not just any belief is being justified". As far as they are concerned they know God specifically willed these actions and thus they are justified.And they too expect to take the consequences of choosing to obey their God who wants them to undertake the actions in question (they think they will ultimately be rewarded for obeying God's will).

If it doesn't matter what others say about God's will justifying their actions why does it matter what you say about God's will justifying your actions?How about we just leave spurious claims about God's will out of it?

And the othet purveyors of God's will consider their holy book or yheir personal communications with God as equally obvious in justifying their actions.Im not disputing anyones sincerity in genuinely believing they know and are acting upon God's will. Im simply pointing out that God's will is invoked to justify all sorts of things that are unjustifiable if one doesnt ascribe to that version of God's supposed will.

I accept that you genuinely believe that yours is the one true God, that your actions are based on your sincere belief that this is His will and that you thus believe such actions to be divinely jusified.I also accept that other people who undertake actions we might both find reprehensible (e.g. Muslim suicide bombers) sincerely believe that their actions are the will of the God they genuinely believe to be true and that they consider their actions to be also divinely justified.The probem is that with all this divine justification and proclaimed yet contradictory claims of knowing the will of the true God going on we can't possibly satisfy everyone in the laws we formulate can we?So what do we do?Well we could pick one of these belief systems, sign up to one particular "will of God" and base our laws on that. This is what Islamist fundamentalists who want to impose Shariah law would like. This is presumably what Christians such as yourself would like. We could go the theocracy route. We could do that.Or we could ignore all this self proclaimed knowledge about the will of God and base our laws on the idea that everyone has a right to believe what they want but not to impose their particular beliefs and prejudices on others. This is called the secularist route.Neither option will satisfy everyone. The theocracy route will only please those who follow that very specific and particular form of theism. The secular route will fail to please those such as yourself who think their particular form of theism should hold special privelige.It ultimately boils down to you wanting your belief system to have special privelige and being very upset and frustrated that not everybody else agrees that you and your particular ilk have special knoweldge of the will of God. But every theocratist feels the same.

Like anyone who wants their particular brand of theocracy to be in place you are frustrated that it's not and that others won't accept your belief that you have the correct version of God's will.This isn't a Christian problem. It's a problem for all religious fundamentalists who believe the law should be based on their specific theistic beliefs whatever stripe those beliefs might be (fundamentalist Christian, Muslim or anything else)