the problem is making medical opinions part of the law - for doctors to follow - in the first place,
if handled differently altogether, as part of the right of medical practicioners to disagree in their opinions on medicine and healthcare (instead of the present cartels of professional orthodoxy we have today), then mo matter what that medical opinion is, the law, and legitimate medical practice, would be mute as to if it is “right” or “wrong” and thus NOT enforceable professionally or legally; in which case the “gay” man could chose to go somewhere else, as he has done, but there would be no “case” to be made in any sense;
similarly, a couple who brought their kid to a doctor looking for help to treat the kid because the kid said they were gay, could chose to refuse to do anything, giving the opinion that nothing was wrong with the kid, and
the parents would look for a different doctor
because of the law? no; because medical orthodoxy is no better than orthodoxy in science; there is always room
and reason for other opinions, and for doctors being
free to offer them and people free to chose them, or not
its called Liberty as opposed to government
If only our times were so enlightened...