The ‘gay cake case’ as one of my YouTube commenters described it was decided upon yesterday by the Supreme Court. They asked whether I would be covering it in my podcast and I will in due course but this is just too tasty to miss out on while it is hot out the oven (refuses to apologise for the pun).

The facts of the case are pretty simple: Gareth Lee wanted a cake made that said “Support Gay Marriage” on it. He went to Ashers Baking Company in Belfast and while they originally accepted the order they later refused on grounds that it is inconsistent with their political beliefs.

The Supreme Court came down in favour of the bakery and of course this provoked the social justice warriors on Twitter who, ever quick to jump from 0 to hyperbole in a flash, started throwing words around like “apartheid”.

In the end this case was decided on human rights grounds but for me this question comes down to one of the first principles that students learn about in law school: invitation to treat. As a reminder this is the idea that when you go into a shop the goods are not offered to you but rather you are making an offer to the shopkeeper. This is an important distinction because it puts the power in the hands of the owner and they are then free to either accept or reject your offer.

Applying that to this case it is clear that not only did the bakers have the right to refuse to bake the cake but should also have the freedom to run their business as they see fit.

Many commentators have pointed out that the actual impact of the ruling is limited because this was about producing the message rather than the identity of the customer. That is true but should that distinction matter?

The levels of homophobia in Northern Ireland are appalling and the fact that gay marriage is still not legal in the six counties is an embarrassment for the whole of the UK but does that give us the right to impose more liberal beliefs on individuals and businesses?

Instead of using the force of the law people should use the force of their wallet. Businesses are driven by profits and if nobody bought from businesses that were openly homophobic then they would have to either change their ways or close down. That would be a truly impactful conclusion to this saga.