I was at a mock admissions process with dean of admissions from Michigan Penn Virginia and Chicago, and someone asked whether disability accomodated LSAT will affect their admissions. They obviously said no, but it was pretty apparent that they were so exstatic about that (your application will have "disability accomdated" printed right on it). This puts you at a double bind. If you do well, then they might think that you got around the system. If you did bad, then they really won't like your application. Level playing field would mean, for example, non-native english speakers like me getting a dictionary next to the LSAT because I don't have a good command of english. If you can do fine with regular time, I would go for that.
Why should it be held against them? If they had a documented disability that puts the applicant at a disadvantage under standard time, how should recieving extra time to level the playing field be held against them? If I have a documented disability, how could an accommodated test not be considered an objective measure? that does not seems right.