...Well, that's me playing with my Devil's Advocacy. Any thoughts?
Aethyr, you mentioned the recent legal battles about florists and bakeries not wanting to be forced into participating/enabling a same-sex marriage. In these cases, the businesses in question have refused service that included baking a wedding cake, or providing wedding flower arrangements. Any other types of patronage was encouraged by the store owners.
My read on the situation is that these new laws popping up are a response to those events, and not some sort of attempt to refuse gay folks service at the lunch counter.
So, I would put this forward...while it is abhorrent to discriminate against a person for what they are (race, religion, lack of religion, sexual orientation, etc.). It is perfectly right and good to discriminate against a person's actions, if you have a principled stance against those actions. The actions in question may be perfectly legal, sanctioned by the culture and government, yet no person should be coerced into endorsing or participating in those actions that they stand against.
To illustrate, imagine this...
An owner of a bakery, is a very passionate animal-rights activist. One day a woman comes in and says that she has just taken her son on his first deer hunting trip. He has killed an impressively large buck. The family is so proud and excited for him that they are throwing him a party. She would like to have a cake done for the event. She asks the baker to decorate the cake with a hunting scene, showing the young lad shooting the deer.
The baker politely explains his opposition to hunting and the killing of animals in any way. He says that he can't bake the cake because they activity that is being celebrated is one that he opposes on principle. He says that he will gladly provide any other service that she wishes
The woman is livid, sees the refusal of service as a discriminatory attack on her rights and threatens a lawsuit. The baker loses in court and is forced to comply and make quarterly reports to the government.
This type of scenario has actually happened to businesses in the U.S.
Jack Phillips refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, but is perfectly happy to provide any other service to them. His refusal to serve is based on the action that is a same-sex wedding, not the people because they are gay. It's obvious that the governement in Colorado is saying that their anti-discrimination law trumps the Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment.
This is what people are afraid will happen to them, and why some people see the need for the law.