As long as you own the copyrights to all the code in your project, there's nothing stopping you from releasing your whole project as dual MIT and GPL licensed. Dual licensing means that your users get a choice of what license to take your code under (so you're not restricting them at all - actually just giving them more options than straight-MIT-licensed).
The GPL code you're linking to just says "you have to let your users have the option of licensing your code under GPL". That's satisfied by a dual-license.
What would stop you from pursuing a dual license was if you had actually pasted slabs of GPL code into your project, since you couldn't re-license that code to people as MIT."
Such dual licensing would be a great help for all of us that cannot use your work because of viral aspect of GPL licence.
I would like to "reopen" old issue about licence.
As I understand, you are not against idea of licensing your code under more permissive licence. And that is possible even when linking to GPL code:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1098051/interfacing-with-gpl-applications-from-mit-licensed-code-is-a-dual-license-una
Such dual licensing would be a great help for all of us that cannot use your work because of viral aspect of GPL licence.