"What if someone doesn't have it in their heart to serve Christians?" With all due respect (and I mean that), this isn't a symmetrical example. He specifically said he doesn't refuse service to homosexuals. An analogous example would be, "What if someone doesn't have it in their heart to provide a product for a church function (Christian)?" And the truthful answer is, I am OK with that. There is a difference between refusing to take on a client for an event or action and refusing to provide services to a client, full stop. Perhaps the law will not see it that way, but there is an actual, ontological distinction to be made. What sets a dangerous precedent is setting up the law such that people who have non-violent, non-harmful beliefs about *events* and *actions* are forced either to act in such a way inconsonant with their beliefs or else close their business. This kind of policy by the left preaches conformity or punishment.