Ryan T. Anderson over at The Daily Signal argues that religious liberty and sexual freedom need not be in tension in a free society: “The way we’ve worked this out in American law is to have a balancing test. Religious liberty isn’t an absolute right. Religious liberty doesn’t always trump. Religious liberty is balanced with concerns for a compelling state interest that’s being pursued in the least-restrictive means possible. But it isn’t clear that forcing every photographer and every baker and every florist to help celebrate same-sex weddings is advancing a compelling state interest in the least-restrictive way possible. … We can have a system of live and let live. And even if government recognizes same-sex relationships as marriages, the government should not coerce third parties into celebrating that marriage. Government should respect the rights of all citizens. And a form of government that’s respectful of free association and free contracts and free speech and the free exercise of religion should protect citizens’ rights to live according to their belief that marriage is the union of a man and woman. Protecting religious liberty and the rights of conscience doesn’t infringe on anyone’s sexual freedoms.” Read the rest of a well reasoned essay here.