Illustration: Andrew Dyson

Australians should ignore the recent calls to water down our discrimination laws. As the question of same-sex marriage moves from if to when, opponents have shifted their attention to religious freedom.

Lyle Shelton, from the Australian Christian Lobby, argues that same-sex marriage and religious freedom are “incompatible”. Adam Ch’ng?, a director of Connect Ministry, warns that same-sex marriage places the freedom of faith communities “at risk”.

Their strategy is unsurprising. Religious liberty has formed an important part of the campaign against same-sex marriage in the United States for about a decade, and it became the centrepiece after the US Supreme Court granted full marriage equality in June.

Several US states have introduced, or threatened to introduce, laws shielding religious individuals and businesses that object to same-sex marriage. Now, opponents are trying to import the same agenda into Australia.

This is not about the liberty of churches and ministers not to perform same-sex weddings if it violates their faith. That kind of religious freedom is a given, and no bills introduced in Australia have challenged it. The core of the latest religious freedom campaign is the liberty to refuse service.

In an episode of the ABC’s Q&A in early June, a Christian calligrapher called for legal safeguards to allow her business to refuse orders for gay wedding invitations. Others, looking again to the US, have raised the spectre of bakers, photographers, florists and reception venues being forced, against their conscience, to serve same-sex couples.

It might appear overwrought to warn of the impending tyranny of gay couples demanding flower arrangements, but there is a beguiling logic to the argument. With a large number of wedding vendors from which to choose, is it not reasonable to allow businesses with religious objections to opt out?

No, it’s not.

Australian law prevents service providers from discriminating against customers on grounds such as race, sex or sexual orientation, because we recognise that those attributes should not impede a person’s participation in civic life.

We also recognise that placing marginalised groups in the ever-present danger of being turned away is not conducive to building a tolerant and peaceful society, and would reinforce historical patterns of exclusion.

By its nature, discrimination law prevents people from picking and choosing customers according to their beliefs.