You may not be aware of the recent report by the Commission on Civil Rights called:  Peaceful Coexistence: Reconciling Nondiscrimination Principles with Civil Liberties A Briefing Before The United States Commission on Civil Rights Held in Washington, DC. The entire report is here.  In the report, groups of the members of the commission issued statements on this question. Here is part of the statement issued by a group headed by commissioner Martin Castro, who is also the chairman:

“Regardless of the pace at which American religious institutions do or do not embrace the reality of civil rights and liberties of LGBT families and of women, religious exemptions to them are, and must remain, few and narrow. Laws which permit discrimination, even if enacted on the basis of religious freedom, are unlikely to be successful when challenged on Constitutional bases. Professor Ira C. Lupu of the George Washington University Law School posits that it is hard to imagine a federal court … find[ing] any constitutionally legitimate basis for any formal policy of exclusion, based on sexual orientation, from state created opportunities. Whether the policy is based on prejudice, animus, or sincere religious belief, it rests on reasons that the state is forbidden to pursue. [footnotes omitted.]34 Some of the many overly-broad religious freedom legislative proposals discussed above will be enacted, some will be defeated, and some will languish in committee. Many will face constitutional challenge and will be overturned by the courts. Nonetheless, the fervent ideological disagreements will continue. Therefore, government officials, advocacy groups, and concerned individuals, as well as persons of faith and of good will, must remain alert and ready to combat future efforts. Nondiscrimination laws stand as a bulwark against the assaults of intolerance and animus. May it always be so.” Page 40.

There are other, even more troubling statements, in the report. Commissioner Castro himself wrote a summary of his position on religious liberty versus human rights:

“The phrases “religious liberty” and “religious freedom” will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance. Religious liberty was never intended to give one religion dominion over other religions, or a veto power over the civil rights and civil liberties of others. However, today, as in the past, religion is being used as both a weapon and a shield by those seeking to deny others equality. In our nation’s past religion has been used to justify slavery and later, Jim Crow laws. We now see “religious liberty” arguments sneaking their way back into our political and constitutional discourse (just like the concept of “state rights”) in an effort to undermine the rights of some Americans. This generation of Americans must stand up and speak out to ensure that religion never again be twisted to deny others the full promise of America.” Page 29

The Catholic Bishops, led by Archbishop Lori of Baltimore, has issued this rebuttal to these statements. You can find it here.