Oh good christ. They're after him because of what he said about legislation passed over 40 years ago when he was a year old?
It looks as though he has problems with the idea of government forcing private businesses to accept customers they don't want to accept -- much like the reasons Barry Goldwater was against the law. Not because he was a racist or that he hated blacks. Mainly that it was not an area where the federal government has any constitutional jurisdiction.
From a strictly libertarian point of view -- can anyone articulate what the difference is between being forced to allow a customer into your private business and being forced to allow someone into your home?
At what point does the question of freedom of association come into this?