Do We Need Labels So Businesses Can Enact their Right to "Religious Freedom?"

In an op-ed published on Alternet and Raw Story, writer John Moyers boils down the argument against "Religious Freedom" bills.  Moyers underlines the ridiculousness of the whole affair:  

"So, perhaps Indiana now needs a law requiring I.D. cards for all citizens — yellow for the hets, pink for the homos — to protect both the souls and the profits of faith-full, freedom-loving Chamber of Commerce members. Or maybe gays should be required to tattoo their foreheads for quick identification. If so, the same should go for straight people who practice oral and anal sex, since what offends some religious beliefs is 'sodomy' defined more broadly, not merely loving someone of the same gender.

What about Jews? Some conservative Christians believe God does not hear the prayers of a Jew. If He can discriminate that way, why can’t a car salesman refuse to sell a Chevy? And what about adulterers? Indiana’s new law is so broad, it clearly protects the freedom to deny service to adulterers if that offends sincerely held religious beliefs. If so, and there’s going to be some sort of I.D. system adopted, it could incorporate a scarlet 'A.'"

Moyers goes to even further, questioning how heterosexuals are supposed to prove their...well, heterosexuality?  Should we all sport tattoos, identifying our race, religion, and sexuality?  Did the Governor of Indiana even consider the nature of labeling when he initially put forth the bill?  

What do you think, vigilant viewers?  Check out Jesse's take on the issue below: