I disagree with the premise that a public business can deny service to those who are not some kind of legitimate health or safety concern.
If they close their doors and become a “members only” type business, then they can deny service to whoever doesn’t sign on to their club restrictions.
Otherwise, it is destructive of public order to deny service for race, creed, etc. that is not legitimately based on health or safety.
Do it by commsission or contract, and the interests of the artist or skilled craftsman becomes the issue.
Then you believe the government is right in sanctioning the videography business in question? Their reason for denying service was religious and not safety or health. What about gun shops and firing ranges who post signs saying no Muslims are allowed? Should the government continue to force them to allow Muslim patrons? Legitimate reasons are sometimes in the eye of the beholder.
Do it by commsission or contract, and the interests of the artist or skilled craftsman becomes the issue.
How does turning down a wedding because it's a same sex couple qualify as a "legitimate health or safety concern"?