I do think this law is bad and that people have a right to be able to buy goods and services.
I already asked in this thread if businesses (in Indiana) currently have an obligation of service to everyone who asks, and if this law would allow shop owners to discriminate against certain categories of people (and not especially gays).
I was answered that: 1) Business owners have no obligation to accept anyone, and can refuse if they deem so. 2) The law is only about if they were sued by an angry rejected customer, that they could invoke (in court) the right to discriminate because of religious beliefs.
So this law is obviously not about precluding gays to buy goods and services. Because the shop owner can already say no without justification. (By the way: How do you know that the person in front of you who wants to buy, is gay or straight? Unless the person is claiming it, but for what reason?)
Note that discriminating people is not necessarily about their sexual orientation! (Especially as in most cases it's unknown to people around.) There are a few restaurants for the wealthy, that don't accept you if you don't have the right (i.e. elegant) clothing. Are you screaming against that? Are gay people screaming against that? And we might also imagine a restaurant's Christian owner refusing to serve a person clothed like a prostitute. Now, many people could understand that it would be bad for the "Christian restaurant" (it could lose customers) if people clothed like prostitutes would come in; but if per chance the person happens to be gay, it suddenly becomes a national scandal?
So what I see here, are drama-queens over-reacting.
(Of course, I must mention this: I support acceptance and respect of others, even if said other persons are of different sexual orientations, different political opinions, different religious beliefs, etc.).