I mentioned before that I once saw on the internet the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court speaking about their need to explain themselves. If the opinion for that cake maker was written with that consideration and arrived like this, what would have happened had it not? I think that the main question to be answered in the mind of any reader is whether the decision taken against the cake shop owner was correct or not. The court on the other hand spoke about the process of reaching that decision without providing any explanation why that should replace looking at the end result as the main question or Why the process couldn't be taken as a separate question instead.
