CUT.
In your logic, all secular law trumps the creator God of the universe's normatively moral law making it immoral to disobey Nazi secular law to surrender Jews in the Third Reich for extermination, making it immoral to warn Christians having Bible studies in totalitarian nations which prohibited them that government goon squads are coming to assault and then imprison them, etc... (the list though not infinite is a very very long one) and autocratically misuse government to deprive normatively moral people of their human rights and religious liberty. If only liberal fascists, like yourself, would practice what they preach and stop hypocritically enforcing their immoral lifestyle choices on normatively moral people and their organizations, violating their human rights in the process.
CUT
Take into account
the rest of the human rights in conjunction with the one you are focusing on and then it might make sense. Anyone can believe what they like, but just like
everyone else, they must respect another's human rights. For instance, a person may well believe that white people are supreme, but to respect the human rights of black people, they must not discriminate against those black people in any way that violates their human rights.
I can believe that Christianity is evil, but I could never discriminate against a christian just because they are christian. If the government stops me treating christians any differently than other citizens, it is because they are protecting the christian's human rights. The government's most prominent rules are the laws of America, or whatever country it may be.
Thus, religious opinion or religious belief is, in the eyes of the law, secondary to the law itself.
If a Christian organization is funded by the government, then they are effectively tied by the contractual agreements the government set out, just like
every other business the government contracts to do work.
Thus, they must abide by said terms.
Now, I can certainly admit that forcing self-funding christian ministries, whose mission statements are clearly to propagate the christian religion, to forego the very tenants
of that religion is wrong. A church, for instance, simply because it is a religious institution who holds the view that homosexuality is wrong, should not be forced to employ people who openly and daily go against that tenant. That we can agree on.
But as far as wider society goes, outside that church's grounds, there is absolutely no way that any member of that church can legally discriminate against homoesexuals.
Whether it is for-profit business who must abide by the business laws of America (whereby a person can buy goods under the same rights as
any other citizen), or whether it is some other scenario, like a homosexual person applying to be a cleaner at a company, they cannot and should not be discriminated against,
just like every other citizen.
The crux of this issue is proper cause. For instance, an employer whose company specifically works with children could refuse to hire a sex offender, because of the danger that offender presents to the children. But a cleaning company not hiring a homosexual simply on the basis of their sexual preference is
not proper cause.
The point of the human rights are to form a basis for social equality, where each citizen is treated fairly and equally. That does not mean that there are not specific exceptions to that rule, but it seems to me that you do not have a sense of proportion.
A shop, let's say, refusing to sell goods to a homosexual because they are camp, is
not proper cause. However, a shop refusing to sell to a customer because they are being rowdy or a member of the crowd has shoplifted before, or because the person who wishes to buy does not have sufficient money - those are proper causes.
What you're effectively saying is that an entire country should bow down to you religious beliefs and allow you to act outside the realms of common law because of them.
I'm sorry, but it doesn't work like that.
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.