The Washington Post reports on an employee refusing to wait on a customer because she had a pro-zionist t-shirt on. The cashier refused to ring up her order, but they ended up getting another cashier to do it. Now, by law that cashier could be fired from her job for refusing to serve a customer. But if the objection was religious, then the law would require “reasonable accommodation” for her tender feelings. Again I ask, why the distinction? It’s not because of the first amendment, which applies only to government actions. Indeed I think there is a plausible argument to be made that such a law is itself a violation of the first amendment because it requires private employers to act differently in response to the exact same action depending on whether the action is religiously motivated or not.