A bill allowing businesses to pass on servicing gay weddings has cleared the Arizona legislature and is on Gov. Brewer's desk. It seems like everyone but Spongebob Squarepants has pleaded with her to veto it.
She might be wise to do so, but not because I'm opposed to the law; photographers and florists (my mom worked three decades as a florist and serviced hundreds of weddings) are essentially a part of a service, and dragging them into a service that insults their faith would be problematic on First Amendment grounds.
Cases on this issue are already working their way through the court system; for example, a New Mexico case has already hit their state Supreme Court with a ruling for the rejected gay couple. The Arizona law would likely be taken to court within milliseconds of a Brewer signing. Given that Arizona is in the 9th district, a slap down and stay of the law would be likely, with a Supreme Court ruling needed to get the law put into effect.
Unless Arizona's case is put on a rocket-docket, one of the other cases will get to the Supremes first. Once the Supreme Court rules on whether discrimination claims or religious liberty claims should carry the day in these cases, the Arizona law will become largely moot.
If they rule that the right to pass on servicing a objectionable wedding is an implied part of the First Amendment, the spirit of the Arizona law has been set for the whole country. If they rule that fighting discrimination trumps those religious objections, the Arizona law would be DOA if an appeal was pursued.
Since Arizona faces another round of whack-a-bigot from the left like they got after passing tough illegal-immigration laws AND the law is going to be either rendered moot or shot down in flames, a veto would be a wise choice, saving Arizona money and abuse and not setting back the spirit of the bill in the long-run.