I believe free speech will correct bad speech and I also believe capitalism is a greater force for progress than anti-discrimination laws.
Case and point, Jim Crow laws were ENFORCED segregation by the government. Why is that significant? Because a free market was causing people/businesses in the south who were NOT racist, to choose money over bigotry. The racists (people and businesses) clearly saw this as an advantage, not in their favor, so what did they do? Use the government to create laws that FORCED businesses to segregate. So society and business typically do not discriminate, yes there are and always will be bigots, but the free market idea is about making money. Not oppressing groups.
Free Speech not Religious Issue
What is seldom mentioned in this Colorado issue is the baker was willing to sell them any cake they had, so in effect, he was not discriminating against them for being gay as individuals, but when it came to preparing one of his unique and special cakes for the wedding, he didn't want to. THAT should be protected. It is his choice not to work with someone. What if it was a gay bakery and a Christian wanted them to put on a cake a homophobic scripture? Shouldn't the owners have the right to say I find this offensive (personally) and choose not to do it? What if a black baker is asked to make a cake for a skinhead wedding and put things on it that are highly offensive to them?
I get it, I hate that people are bigots, especially based on religion and the bible. But we have to preserve rights. Every time an opponent does something we don't like, we run to the government to make them stop, The government then usually would infringe on rights, for all! They basically make a blunt object to clobber them with that can then be used for others in a malevolent way.
We need to be careful. When you censor, when you restrict, you often embolden the other side and threaten multiple rights. It's a radical idea, but maybe we should allow people to openly discriminate, let them show who they are, the market will put them out of business because most people object to this behavior. If you have the government make more laws, they simply change their speech, still discriminate quietly without the burden of proof, and we are all left with the laws. This will probably not ever happen so we need to make clear and careful lines and consider all rights, just not what makes us angry, it's hard to play devil's advocate, but its the only way to proceed logically.
Why would you want someone who is bigoted towards you to make something for you?
Why would you want to be employed by someone you don't want to work for? To me, that is the issue. He was turning down employment in a way, not disallowing people to buy his damn cakes.