Business owners should, frankly, be able to service anyone they so choose. It’s none of the government’s business who a man does business with so long as it’s legal business, and the refusal to do business shouldn’t matter in the slightest.
Not to disagree with you, but if you substituted “black” for “lesbian”, you’d get very little support for the same statement.
Even people who might actually agree with you would say they didn’t, so ingrained is the culture of non-discrimination when it comes to race. We all “know” that it was wrong to have whites-only seats, to not allow black and white people to date, to have separate water fountains, and make blacks sit on the back of the bus.
So we passed laws making it illegal for a business to discriminate against people based on their race. And ever since then, more and more “classes” of people have fought to expand those laws to cover their “class”.
BTW, the Americans with Disabilities Act is a form of the same mentality — that disabled people shouldn’t be “refused service” by physical barriers to their entry. And again, a solid majority of the country would defend those laws, although not on the margins yet, because people are practical when laws are not.
In this case though, I should think the shirt maker has a very strong case. He isn’t refusing to provide service to the lesbians. He is refusing to put a message on his shirts to sell to them that he disagrees with.
I should think he would also be allowed not to put swear words or offensively suggestive comments on t-shirts as well.