I don’t think she did. The article is not clear, because it includes a line about “they called the store”, but the woman says they do not allow messages, so she would bake a cake, but put no message on it.
So in fact, the article is about how she thought about refusing to bake a cake AT ALL for a Christian, simply because the Christian believed homosexuality was a sin.
But she was afraid (and rightly so) that refusing to bake a cake for a person based on that person’s beliefs would break the law.
And they didn’t pick up the cake, but that could be because they were told that the cake would NOT BE MADE IN CONFORMANCE TO THE REQUEST.
If I’m reading this right, this whole article is:
- A person ordered a cake with a message.
- The shop refused to make the cake with a message
- The shop CONSIDERED not allowing the person to buy a cake.
- The shop filled the “order” without the requested message
- The people did not pick up the cake that didn’t match what they ordered.
I missed the key part: "In the end, Anderson filled the order and baked the cake in line with the policy of her shop, which does not permit specialty messages on desserts ordered online."
Mea culpa.