The bible is stunningly clear in it's message that they are to neither persecute nor judge those who disagree. I'm saying that a religious argument should not hold water for the sake of "religious freedom" without demonstrable consistency. If I can't call my pastafarian beliefs religion, then people who make up new ways to completely ignore massive swaths of their scripture deserve the same. If you're not consistent, then it's a discrimination issue not a religious one. If your messiah tells you not to judge, then you're not actually practicing your religion when you pass judgement.
To my knowledge, there was no violent action, but there was threats. Resorting to threats of death over something that didn't cause physical harm is a truly reprehensible thing to me. However, it lend no more validity to the bakery owner's position in my mind.
As far as religious convictions go, there is a handy window in christianity to avoid these problems: "Do unto your neighbor as you would have him do unto you.". The son of god was pretty clear about not treating people differently on account of beliefs.
