"Creatively designed" is not something you can reasonably apply to most businesses. While I can't speak for her my position on this:
Then you oppose the broader SCOTUS ruling that goes beyond religion? This ruling is based on freedom of expression. In theory, deeply held political convictions should also be exempted from antidiscrimination laws. Theoretically, QAnon cult members are now free to run businesses that sell "creatively designed" services and goods that are denied to protected groups that they want to discriminate against. The previous wedding cake decision was about religion. This one goes beyond that.
1) The item in question must be truly creative. Custom, not variation on stock and requiring actual creative thought on the part of the person doing it. (Designing the decoration for a cake: yes. Creating the provided design, whether from the customer or an in-house source: no.) I can't recall ever purchasing such a product.
2) The reason must be relevant to the product, not merely to the customer. If we go to the cabinet store it doesn't matter how vehemently the designer objects to miscegenation, there's nothing about races in cabinets.
A company may assert that serving certain demographics conflicts with its foundational principles. This notion stems from the legal concept of corporate personhood, where corporations possess equivalent First Amendment rights to individuals. Therefore, when an employee carries out their duties aligned with the company's principles, it nullifies any contention about creativity in the process.