It began with a cake. More accurately, no cake. A Colorado bakery owner cited religious beliefs for refusing to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The couple sued, alleging discrimination, and mass media ran with the story.

Fundamentalist religious groups lobbied federal and state legislatures to allow religious beliefs to be used as a defense for violating certain laws and rights. What has been the track record? Probably not what the proponents intended.

In Tucson, trespassing convictions were reversed for a religious group that placed food and water along known immigration routes. Illegal immigrants were dying along the route. The religious group said they were fulfilling the lesson of the Good Samaritan. They argued that their religious practices required reversal of their convictions for trespassing on government land. They won.

In San Antonio, a religious leader wanted to demolish part of an historic building to expand and accommodate larger religious groups. He argued that his religious rights were more important than local zoning laws protecting historic buildings.

In New York, religious freedoms were invoked by members of a Muslim group. They refused the FBI’s request to spy on fellow members. The FBI placed them on no-fly lists. They used religious freedom protections under federal law to sue the FBI. They claimed their religious beliefs could not be used against them when they refused the FBI’s requests.

There might be lessons from this. One is to be careful what you wish for. Crafting legislation to favor one group might have unforeseen consequences when the law is used by other groups in unanticipated ways. Some fundamentalist Christian groups that wanted religious protection now question how religious rights are being used.

Update: The Colorado baker won the lawsuit brought by the same-sex couple.