The Limits of Religious Freedom

If you support the religious freedom bill that was passed in Mississippi (and the one that was vetoed in Georgia), then you probably also support the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, and their right to deny service to LGBT couples.  But do you also support the religious freedom of the following people?

Indiana state trooper fired for proselytizing during traffic stops

Hamilton told Fox 59 that he was "just following what the Lord told me to do and you can’t change what the Lord tells you to do. So if the Lord tells me to speak about Jesus Christ, I do. And that’s why they fired me so that’s where we’re at."

Mississippi RV park owner evicts interracial couple
“Oh, it’s a big problem with the members of my church, my community and my mother-in-law,” she quoted him as saying. “They don’t allow that black and white shacking.”

Athol man sues ITD employee under law of Moses

Jensen asserts that if he prevails in the suit, Mosaic law dictates that all damages must be paid in 30 days, or Pemble would be required to forfeit all of the assets he and his family own and his family members and their descendants would be held as bond servants — each paying 20 percent of their monthly income to him — until the debt is finally settled in full.

I can only hope that you think at least some of these people should not be given legal exemption for their sincerely-held religious beliefs.  But then the question becomes, if you agree with the Mississippi law and the Oregon bakers, but not (some or all of) these people, what do you see as the difference between them?  How do you define which sincerely-held religious beliefs should be given legal exemption and which should not?