Actually both are equal in the Constitution’s eyes. SCOTUS has made that clear for a very long time. There always needs to be a balance. No Constitutional right is absolute.
The issue with discrimination is who is a “suspect” class. For instance, you don’t get to “refuse service” based on race by citing the First Amendment. So those that think “religious freedom” trumps all are just flat wrong.
But ... the issue is are homosexuals a “suspect class”. The answer should be, and has been, “no” but that is not where we are headed.
RE: But ... the issue is are homosexuals a “suspect class”.
In the case of Colorado, it isn’t even about homosexuals. It is about the Sacrament of MARRIAGE.
The Christian Bakers would be glad to bake homosexuals a cake anytime. However they do not want to participate in a “MARRIAGE” which they consider sacrilegious.
In this case, I would say “yes”, their constitutional right to practice their religion should trump the gays demanding that their “marriage” be served.
Not sure where you get the idea, EXCEPT for the 9 black-robed tyrany, that our Rights are ‘not absolute’ (and they call us L’tarians kooky here)
BOTH are Rights and both in the 1st: of Religion and of Assembly (the latter being how one can ‘discriminate’ for OR against anyone/thing else).
If a biz owner wishes to discriminate, for WHATEVER reason they deem, it is THEIR biz to do so....I have as much a Right to NOT associate and/or shop there. *I*, nor the gov’t, pays for that biz employees, taxes, fees, utilities, etc.; nor should the same be making rules/etc. that might be counter to the biz/owner.