I was kind of half listening to this on the radio last night – interesting debate.

A chap ordered a cake from a baker that he wanted decorated with a message celebrating same-sex marriage (or civil partnership). Baker refunds money and refuses order as he is a “Christian Baker” and the cake is an abomination.

Chap say that he is being discriminated against for being gay by the baker. Baker says he has the right to express his religious beliefs. And this is all in Northern Ireland, the world home of balanced and considered views when it comes to such matters.

Who is right ?? Are they both right ?? (Have we done this already ?) Cake off !!

I bet 10p there’s businesses in Brighton that compromise their beliefs to maintain a customer base

Was it a rainbow cake?

Would you want to eat a cake made by someone who was forced to make it by a lawsuit?

Personal opinion only, the bakers are **** and deserve to lose customers. You open a public business as a baker and take the consequences.

They’re using the excuse that a vegetarian café could refuse to serve meat, the fundamental difference is the vegetarian café would be opened and advertised as vegetarian.

What the bakers want is similar to me opening a bike shop and refusing service to Audi Drivers because I believe that Audi’s are the car of the devil.

I suspect the case is getting so much publicity because it crosses over into devolved laws and the various legal entities want to make sure that any legal precedents set aren’t going to stitch anyone up later.

Has this not been decided (in the courts) already, it’s quite an old case?

Parts of Scotland (among others) come a close second BTW 🙁 – where was the gay B&B case?

Can a cake be gay ?

A big lavender cream puff?

Have we done this already ?

Yep.

While I think everyone’s views should be respected. iIf you want to run a business, then it can’t be above the law. The Bakers aren’t a charity or religious organisation.

It was on the radio last night – must be an appeal going through or something – first I had heard about it, and I have a google alert set up for gay Christian cakes in Ulster.

They’re using the excuse that a vegetarian café could refuse to serve meat, the fundamental difference is the vegetarian café would be opened and advertised as vegetarian.

The difference is that a vegetarian café doesn’t use certain ingredients. You might find other restaurants which serve meat, but not foie gras, for example.

I’m pretty sure that you can’t buy gay flour and eggs…

The UK’s discrimination laws protect people from discriminate against because of:

age
being or becoming a transsexual person
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or having a child
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion, belief or lack of religion/belief
sex
sexual orientation

Having a “religious belief” doesn’t exclude you from the law

The vegetarian restaurant argument is poor.

Complicated issue but I don’t think it should have ended up being a legal matter. The customer may feel wronged under equality legislation but on the other hand the business owner have their human rights that protects the religious beliefs and one should not trump the other.
If one is allowed to be victorious over the other it will lead to abuse of the system.

I think the right way around this is to insist that shops which wish to make a massive silly fuss about serving gay people be required to display a prominent sign reading:

“No Gayness Tolerated Here Because We Are Good Christian Folk”.

🙂

but on the other hand the business owner have their human rights that protects the religious beliefs and one should not trump the other.

Homophobia, Racism and Misogyny are examples of beliefs that don’t need protecting not matter what excuse is used.

Stupid bakers are entirely able to reject custom. If they’d said they were too busy or didn’t have pink icing or whatever other entirely fabricated but not blatently homophobic reason it’d be fine. But dumbasses rejected it because it might be seen to make them approve of gay. And for that level of stupidity and willingness to argue alone they deserved to lose their legal case.

If there religion specifically said they couldn’t bake gay cakes I’d be more tolerant tbh but this isn’t “my religion doesn’t let me do this”, it’s “I don’t want to do this, because I’m a ****, also religion blah blah”

the business owner have their human rights that protects the religious belief

That protects them from not being discriminated against, ie a gay bakers wouldn’t be allowed to refuse them on grounds of their beliefs. It doesn’t protect their right to be discriminatory bellends.

Religions crow about how they have shaped morals in modern society, but I can only see evidence of how they have held them back.

but on the other hand the business owner have their human rights that protects the religious beliefs and one should not trump the other.
Homophobia, Racism and Misogyny are examples of beliefs that don’t need protecting not matter what excuse is used.

It’s still their religious belief, like it or not. Just the same as you can’t force the church to allow a same sex marriage.
If you go down this road of forcing others to bend to your will regardless of their own human rights what is stop people being forced to do things that offends their beliefs in fear of being prosecuted under another law.

Just the same as you can’t force the church to allow a same sex marriage.

They should. If they want to keep the same tax breaks etc that they currently have, they should have to abide by all the laws, not pick and choose.

I suppose a different analogy would be if the bakers were asked to make a cake with a swastika on it. To which the answer is that neo-Nazis aren’t a persecuted group.

Just the same as you can’t force the church to allow a same sex marriage.

Which was a mistake, if churches are to be part of the legal process of marriage then they should not be allowed to discriminate. No good having laws against discrimination and then saying actually it doesn’t apply to everyone. It is an insanely stupid and ironic interpretation of discrimination that the law actually excludes elements of society in such a manner.

Would it not have just been simpler to call the baker a prat, give him a good slagging via twitter/facebook and find another more sensible baker?

Should we treat all crimes that way?

Would it not have just been simpler to call the baker a prat, give him a good slagging via twitter/facebook and find another more sensible baker?

IIRC the point of the cake was to make a point rather than get a cake.

No, but in this case maybe.

His views are stupid but he’s entitled to them.

Just the same as you can’t force the church to allow a same sex marriage.

Which is why we shouldn’t have a state church and why they shouldn’t be performing the legal part of wedding ceremonies.

It’s still their religious belief, like it or not.

They are free to hold whatever view they want, no matter how bigoted. Doesn’t mean it can’t be criticised.

Just the same as you can’t force the church to allow a same sex marriage.

Well actually we (society) could if we (society) wanted to.

A deeply held racist belief wouldn’t be tolerated even were it based on a religious belief.

I’m not agreeing that it is right but I don’t agree with ignoring the other parties religious beliefs. If they argued that they aren’t doing the cake because they hate gays and were atheist then prosecute them but they had beliefs regardless of how out of touch with society they may be.

If they argued that they aren’t doing the cake because they hate gays and were atheist then prosecute them but they had beliefs regardless of how out of touch with society they may be.

You don’t get a free pass to break the law just because or your religion.

If they argued that they aren’t doing the cake because they hate gays and were atheist then prosecute them but they had beliefs regardless of how out of touch with society they may be.

So it’s ok for Christians to hate gays, but not atheists? Why should one particular belief trump another?

swavis – Member

Would it not have just been simpler to call the baker a prat, give him a good slagging via twitter/facebook and find another more sensible baker? Don’t think it’s really about a cake, tbh. It’s a gay activist playing ‘Gotcha!’ with a couple of backward Christians, thus infantilising a major issue for NI society. A plague on both their houses.

So it’s wrong to highlight criminality?

Seems quite a different viewpoint to the one expressed on this thread

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/anybody-know-a-les-boxall-or-similar

Boycott the cake maker?

What if was sexist or racist?

So it’s ok for Christians to hate gays, but not atheists?

I don’t think the baker ever said they hated gay people.

The issue they had was the slogan was along the lines of “Support Gay Marriage”.

There are lots of religious groups that don’t have a problem with gay relationships or civil partnerships but don’t agree with gay marriage. The argument being that it is a religious ceremony.

I heard some gay guy on the radio arguing that he didn’t want gay “marriage” and that there should only be civil partnerships.

It’s a tricky situation and seems to have been more complicated be some of the devolved laws brought in by NI to protect religious beliefs.

For context Ashers is not a quaint local bakery. They supply various baked goods to most shops in Northern Ireland including Tescos. They’re a million pound if not multi million pound business, and despite this the “family” had their legal fees paid by the Christian Institute.

The family have ties to, and move in the same political/religious circles as the DUP. The ruling party in Northern Ireland and the party who have consistently blocked, veto’d and obstructed any and all bills for gay rights and equality in Northern Ireland.

There was obviously some prior comment or action which led to this cake fiasco, and Ashers had originally agreed to bake the cake knowing it was just a cake but they changed their minds no doubt after consulting with their friends in the DUP, the Free Presbyterian Church and the Christian Institute.

I think you should be able to choose a civil partnership or marriage regardless of sexuality, and I don’t think the church should be involved with either, if you want a religious ceremony or blessing fine but it should not be legally recognised.
I used to be fine with church weddings having legal recognition, but then they started picking on the gays so in my mind they lost that right.

Oh and I checked, Ashers bakery in Scotland are not connected to the NI one so supplies of dreamrings are uninterrupted.

From what I remember from when this was originally reported it was not the fact the chap was gay, it was the slogan he wanted on the cake that they refused.

If he had gone in and asked for a standard wedding cake I don’t imagine it would have been an issue but to knowingly ask a religious baker to put a slogan on a cake you know they disagree with is a bit of a childish thing to do.

Do you think they should put anything on a cake that the public ask for? What about going in to Millies Cookies and asking for a birthday cookie with “Millies cookies are S”£te” on it. Do you think they would refuse to do that knowing full well it would offend them?

Whilst the guy should not be refused service for his orientation he comes across as being an monumentally antagonistic tool.

I don’t think the baker ever said they hated gay people.

I was responding to a quote.

The argument being that it is a religious ceremony.

Marriage is not a religious ceremony.

Marriage is not a religious ceremony.

Correct but getting married in church is a religious ceremony. Same sex marriages aren’t conducting in churches or mosques and Christian ceremonies are not performed in mosques and visa versa as it offends their beliefs
I don’t have any belief any religion but nor do I get people to act against their faith.

Tatchell covers the difference between discriminating between an individual and against an idea quite well here. I’m sure there is an overlap between the two, so it’s good that it’s all getting an airing in the Appeal Court.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/01/gay-cake-row-i-changed-my-mind-ashers-bakery-freedom-of-conscience-religion

Doesn’t make the owners right to be anti gay marriage, but it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re breaking the law.

A good contrast is the Christian B&B owners who chucked out a couple of gay blokes – that’s direct discrimination.

jonm81
knowingly ask a religious baker to put a slogan on a cake you know they disagree with is a bit of a childish thing to do.

They don’t advertise themselves as a Christian only Bakery.

Do you think they should put anything on a cake that the public ask for? What about going in to Millies Cookies and asking for a birthday cookie with “Millies cookies are S”£te” on it. Do you think they would refuse to do that knowing full well it would offend them?

The counter argument is always this, but you are equating LGBT equality with something offensive.

“Oh now a racist can ask for a cake that says death to all Muslims or blacks or ****”
No, because that’s offensive. Saying gay people should have equal rights is not offensive.

However, if it passes that a Christian baker can refuse to bake a cake because someone’s lifestyle choice disagrees with their iron age superstition you now have a legal precedent that a Jewish baker can refuse to bake Christmas cake, or a muslim baker can refuse to bake a cake for a soldier or a neo-nazi baker can refuse to bake a cake for black people because it goes against their deeply held belief.

Whilst the guy should not be refused service for his orientation he comes across as being an monumentally antagonistic tool.

You might feel like a massively antagonistic tool if people used iron age superstition to determine your freedom to live your life as an equal member of society.