Why would you expect people who see nothing wrong with destroying a mom'n'pop bakery over its antipathy to gay wedding cakes to have any philosophical commitment to diversity of opinion? And once you no longer have any philosophical commitment to it it's easy to see it the way Miliband and Cotler do - as a rusty cog in the societal machinery that can be shaved and sliced millimeter by millimeter.It's a great article about the Pamela Geller incident in Garland Texas and free speech. You should read the whole thing. But this idea I had would really work. It's all built on the First Amendment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.While I was reading the article, I realized that the court can ruin you for discrimination, but they CAN'T take away your freedom of speech. If I'm a baker, this is the cake a gay couple would get. See? I wouldn't discriminate. They want a cake with two grooms on it or two brides? That's exactly what they'd get. Plus a little something extra expressing my own freedom to say exactly what I think.
If you know any conscientious wedding cake bakers, pass this idea along. I don't see how any court could possible rule against an artist expressing free thought. I don't see why photographers couldn't use a similar strategy using photo-shopping techniques. You want pictures of a gay wedding? Sure thing buddy. I hope you like all your friends and family sporting a big red clown nose and a well-rendered dunce cap.