I agree with the second point. Ben Shapiro doesn’t believe in live and let live. Yet I profoundly disagree with your first point.
“When one chooses to start a business and engage in commercial activity with members of the public, one agrees to abide by the rules that govern that commercial activity for all others”
exactly, agree to abide by the rules that govern that commercial activity. And will agree to abide with any changes, as long as there’s a desire to continue activity, sure. But resisting change is also a right, no? When a change is proposed, the public speaks and then a change may or may not go ahead.
But the main fault in your argument is setting on equality terms the verbal/visual attacks on homosexuality with refusing service. That may become obvious if you’re looking at various services individually.
Doctors take an oath of service, to save lives. I thoroughly disagree with allowing exceptions. If you’re in the public service, then you must serve according to the requirements of the position. If you’re into politics, regardless of your views, when you legislate you also legislate for homosexuals, muslims, immigrants or whatever other labels we may fall under.
But if you’re in private business … why exactly should someone be compelled to accept doing business? If I open a bar, why wouldn’t I have the right to select clientele on whatever grounds? It’s a free market, right? I do think it’s wrong to use business as a vehicle for political stance, but that’s not the point. If someone does want to do that, I think they should be allowed to and at the same time they should suffer economically when they make decisions based on grounds other than business itself.
If I’m a photographer and I refuse business for a gay wedding, then please put my name on a list and boycott it. Don’t make a law forcing me to do business.
Also, “I don’t want to do business with you” isn’t the same as “I’m going to your house or public space to slap you in the face”. You do see the difference, right?