What, are you an apologist for Brad Avarkian? The bakers did not refuse to sell cakes to "gay" customers as such, but only refused to cater a "gay" wedding. They have made it clear that the same customers would have been sold birthday cakes or lots of cupcakes with no problem. That an unelected bureaucrat in Oregon with an animus against Christians pretends he can't see the difference is no reason for anyone here at FR to not understand the difference.
Not sure what distinction you think that is but the legal problem the baker got into stems from anti-discrimination laws. If anything compels one to make gay wedding cakes, it's those. Not the Supreme Court decision. That's what I'm explaining.
The court decision doesn't compel anyone to do anything, if you aren't an official involved in marriage licenses. So it would be hard to engage in civil disobedience against a law that didn't require you to do anything. You want to engage in civil disobedience against anti-discrimination laws? That's a bit more practical because there's actually something you can do there.
That what this thread is about after all. "Civil Disobedience", right there in the title. Got to have something to disobey.