RFRA is biblically indefensible and contradicts Christians' other statements
Let's start with the bible. Having spent four years doing graduate work in theology, I've actually read the bible -- rather than just turning pages and cherry-picking random quotes here and there. I've read it in Greek, Latin, and several English translations.
What stands out about the Jesus of the NT is that he had an open table. He welcomed anyone without any preconditions of their beliefs or behavior. He turned no one away. He never refused his "services" to anyone.
This is what earned him the hatred of the "religious authorities." This is what they criticized him for - and eventually killed him for.
So anyone who does discriminate in this way is not following Jesus. They are rejecting him. They may call themselves "Christians," but they are not followers of his.
To my second point, whenever you criticize churchgoers for any type of behavior, the go-to answer is that church "isn't for the perfect, but for sinners." So if the churches can provide services to sinners, why don't Christians follow their example and provide services to people they (wrongly) consider "sinners."
My neighbor is one of these self-righteous Christians, but he'll drive 80 miles to the state prison where he can minister to murders, rapists, and thieves. But he doesn't want to do business with LGBT people. WTF is that all about? Oh, yeah, hypocrisy.
