"But it's your argument that I'm taking to its logical conclusion."

No it isn't, because my argument was not for absolute freedom of religion. That should be clear enough if you've read my posts.

"You can't apply the judge's decision in one case to a law that doesn't exist - unless you're claiming to be able to see into the future."

The principle involved in Laws' decision is dangerous. Whether it will be applied to future cases remains to be seen. I don't know if it will, and neither do you, but it is a dangerous precedent and a wholly unnecessary one. McFarlane had no standing to sue, and the specifics of his case really had nothing to do with religion. He refused to do his job, and for this he was fired. That should have been the end of the story.

The couple in question had no right to counseling from McFarlane over any other (more qualified) counselor, any more than I have the 'right' to purchase a bacon cheeseburger from any specific individual at at restaurant. If an employee of a restaurant that has bacon cheesburgers on the menu refuses to sell me one based upon his religious beliefs, his employer has the right to fire that employee. McFarlane's employer had the right to fire him. End of story.