[Closed] same sex marridge cake

What homophobes choose to do in the privacy of their own homes is their business, but I don't want my kids seeing it.

😆

Uch, the 'labels' are so tiring. I cannot wait for the day then we don't have to have a big ****-off label slapped on our foreheads. I'm almost feel that all the 'gay rights/pride' stuff encourages the labeling even further.

/end of pointless rant.

So the Halal butcher should sell me bacon if I asked him, or should I go to another butcher?

If he sells bacon to other people, then yes he should sell it to you.

I assume what they object to is baking a cake that promotes homosexuality, not baking a cake for a homosexual?

Are people still allowed to hold the view that homosexuality is wrong? If so, are they then entitled to decline to make something that promotes a view that opposes theirs?

Would it be unlawful or wrong for a gay baker to refuse to bake a cake with the Christian Institute logo on it for a Christian Institute party, ordered by a heterosexual customer, because it promoted something they didn't agree with?

So the Halal butcher should sell me bacon if I asked him, or should I go to another butcher?

The butcher should sell you something they don't stock? Not quite the same as a cake shop refusing to sell a cake, is it?

But the halal butcher doesn't serve bacon, if you were guy and he sold bacon to other customers but not you then that's discrimination. Going into a halal butchers and ordering bacon is harassment, similar to going into a Christian bakery and ordering a design that offends their beliefs. Good grief I can't believe I'm defending the god botherers.

He did them a favour. I wish my baker would stop selling me delicious cakes and biscuits. The bastard.

GrahamS - Member
So the Halal butcher should sell me bacon if I asked him, or should I go to another butcher?
If he sells bacon to other people, then yes he should sell it to you.

So in this instance the baker is in the right as he would have refused a homosexually themed cake to anyone? 😕

Having read through all the above I'm can't figure out who's arguing what any more.

EDIT: I have no view of my own as it's bound to be wrong!

Going into a halal butchers and ordering bacon is harassment, similar to going into a Christian bakery and ordering a design that [s]offends their beliefs[/s] contradicts the bits of the bible they've cherry-picked to support their prejudices.

?

ransos - Member
So the Halal butcher should sell me bacon if I asked him, or should I go to another butcher?
The butcher should sell you something they don't stock? Not quite the same as a cake shop refusing to sell a cake, is it?

Depends, bacon is a type of meat and a Halal butcher sells meat. (A massive over simplification of your cake categorising analogy)

I walked into a butchers in town who (unbeknownst to me only specialised in pork products), I asked if he had any whole chickens or joints of beef - needless to say I didn't get what I was after.

The butcher should sell you something they don't stock? Not quite the same as a cake shop refusing to sell a cake, is it?

Going into a halal butchers and ordering bacon is harassment, similar to going into a Christian bakery and ordering a design that offends their beliefs.

Hmm.. that's a fair point. 😕

I don't think either qualifies as harassment though, unless they do it repeatedly.

And the cake situation was done to highlight possibly illegal discrimination, not just piss off the shop owners.

Are people still allowed to hold the view that homosexuality is wrong? If so, are they then entitled to decline to make something that promotes a view that opposes theirs?

Imagine that the bakers were racists who were opposed to anti-racism campaigns, and they'd refused to make a cake that was commissioned for 'Show Racism the Red Card', on the grounds of not wanting racial harmony and thinking that black people were a bit ewww.

They're allowed to hold those views, they'll just get into trouble if they start actively discriminating because of those views.

Give us a few more days and we'll have better stories making the headlines 😆

The butcher should sell you something they don't stock? Not quite the same as a cake shop refusing to sell a cake, is it?

But they didn't refuse to sell them a cake - they refused to make them a cake with the name of a campaign group on it. That really isn't the same thing.

It's illegal to discriminate against a person for their sexuality, gender or race but I don't think the same goes for 'discriminating' against a campaign group.

I'm sure I would be (rightly) in trouble for not employing someone because of their religious beliefs but I would I really get into trouble for refusing to do work for Concern (Christian rights group)?

The bakers weren't refusing to bake a cake for a gay person, were they? They were refusing to decorate a cake in a manner that goes against their beliefs...
If the gay bloke had gone into the bakers asking for a cake that said "Happy Diwali" or "Good Luck Bob" there wouldn't have been an issue.

Does the baker really have to accept the job?

It would be a lot better if bigoted business people had some sort of directory they could advertise in that we could all see. Then if I wanted a cake made I could see the above bakery was a bigot and then never buy their goods.

Give it ten years and this will all have blown over and 99% of people will wonder what in the hell it was all about.

I do get confused, however. The god squad brigade *really* have several nests of bees in their bonnet about gay folk to the apparent exclusion of all other things in their book.

But they didn't refuse to sell them a cake - they refused to make them a cake with the name of a campaign group on it. That really isn't the same thing.

The bakers weren't refusing to bake a cake for a gay person, were they? They were refusing to decorate a cake in a manner that goes against their beliefs...

No: the bakers said "It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches"

Maybe, but it made headlines and got all of us talking about it - so I'd say job done really.

I believe the opposite, just looking at this thread there are in my view far more people seeing or having sympathy the baker's point of view than there were on say the Church vs gay marriage threads. This illustrates how artificial constructs can be counterproductive.

After all, Rosa Parks did not get on that bus with the intention to protest, but when asked to move, she refused because she had had enough - it was a spontaneous act of defiance and all the more powerful as a result.

ransoms - I'm not seeing how what they said contradicts the two posts you quoted?

And bear in mind, they've said it's time to "make a stand". (Fully backed up by the Christian Institute who will no doubt fund their legal costs should it go to court...they like spending their money fighting against LGBT rights, and getting siblings added to the list of people who should be allowed have civil partnerships. 🙄 )

They're allowed to hold those views, they'll just get into trouble if they start actively discriminating because of those views.

So would it be ok it be ok for a gay baker to refuse to bake a cake with the Christian Institute logo on it for a Christian Institute party?

No: the bakers said "It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches"

I do agree, rereading, that that it could be construed that way - i.e. its a cake for a gay wedding so we turned it down because of that. However, I think there is plenty of wriggle room for the baker that his comments refer specifically to campaign agenda of the group the logo of which the couple wanted on the cake.

Which every way you cut it (pun intended) you do wonder how deliberately the baker was targeted and how deliberately inflammatory the cake design was. If it had been a far more anonymous cake I wonder if the baker would have had any issue.

Who puts the logo of a campaign group on their wedding cake ffs! It would be like me having the greenpeace logo on my birthday cake!

ransoms - I'm not seeing how what they said contradicts the two posts you quoted?

Their justification appears to be a literal interpretation of the bible. Given that the bible (to be the best of my knowledge) has nothing to say about Sesame street or Queerspace, then their refusal can only be the bible's condemnation of sodomy.

If they had any guts, they should at least be consistent and refuse commissions for farmers, bankers and menstruating women.

Which every way you cut it (pun intended) you do wonder how deliberately the baker was targeted and how deliberately inflammatory the cake design was.

They may well have been. Good.

Ok, I see what you're getting at now. Perhaps a separate issue though (an interesting one mind).

ransos - Member

No: the bakers said "It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches"

That's what I said- their beliefs didn't prevent them from baking the cake; they chose to discriminate against gay people based on their beliefs. But there's nothing in the bible that prevented them from baking the cake.

Who puts the logo of a campaign group on their wedding cake ffs!

It's not a wedding cake.

It was a cake requested by a gay rights activist, specifically to start this debate and legal challenge.

Do we know if any of the bakers were clean shaven?

I agree with many on here, in that I strongly disagree with the baker's views, but I do think that they should not be forced to make things that contradict their beliefs. There is a big difference (in my mind, and probably in law) between saying "I will not sell you this here cake, because you are gay and I don't like gay people", and saying "We don't make / sell cakes like that". I think it's pretty much certain that if a straight person asked for the same design then they too would have been refused.

If I were a baker and someone asked me to bake a cake that said "gay people are really rubbish", then I would decline. In doing so, I wouldn't be discriminating against gay-haters, so much as saying "these are my hands, and just because I sell cakes, that doesn't mean that you can force me to do whatever you like with my hands". Clearly the historical context is different so it's not a perfect analogy, but still. In a similar vein, if you went to that baker and said "I am a Jew. Please make me a cake that says 'Judaism is best, and Jesus was not the son of God'.", would you really think that the baker would be anti-Semitic if he declined?

The only real difference (to my mind) is that the baker's anti-homosexuality beliefs are at odds with mine. I think he's 100% definitely blindingly obviously wrong to think that being gay is wrong. But I do still think that he's allowed to *think* that.

Oh and on the subject of clubs discriminating against women etc., hopefully the very idea of having to force them to be inclusive will be daft before too long. What *should* be done is that the right-minded majority would shun anywhere that was discriminating like that, so they'd disappear. In much the same way as I'm fairly sure (naively hope..) that any golf club which put forward a "no black people" policy would be forced to change its stance by its members refusing to remain.

this does all remind me a bit of when Obama was elected (stay with me on this one..) they asked a black woman if she thought things had changed/progress had been made as they had elected a black president.
Her Reply - It will be when you don't feel the need to ask the question.

Basically when we stop putting labels on people and just accept people have the same rights to be who they are then the world will be better.

[i]I think he's 100% definitely blindingly obviously wrong to think that being gay is wrong[/i]

He might not think that. He might even be gay. But his beliefs say gay marriage is wrong.

Have you seen the page has changed now?
[i]The cake was ordered for an International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia event, hosted by Alliance councillor Andrew Muir, [b]who said another bakery accepted the order[/i][/b]

Move along!
😆

There is a big difference (in my mind, and probably in law) between saying "I will not sell you this here cake, because you are gay and I don't like gay people", and saying "We don't make / sell cakes like that". I think it's pretty much certain that if a straight person asked for the same design then they too would have been refused.

I'm not sure - for the reasons you state - that what they did was illegal, but I'm pleased that they've been outed as bigots. Perhaps if their trade suffers as a result, they will know what it feels like to be discriminated against.

It's not a wedding cake.

It was a cake requested by a gay rights activist, specifically to start this debate and legal challenge.

I'm clearly having a hard of reading day!

It would be interesting to know how the refusal was worded. If he had any sense he would have agreed to make the cake, but refused to put the specific graphics on it. I can't believe I find myself defended the rights of someone to hold a view I don't agree with because of religious views which I abhor!

Oh and on the subject of clubs discriminating against women etc., hopefully the very idea of having to force them to be inclusive will be daft before too long.

True, but that's [i]slightly[/i] more nuanced given that we also have things like women's only nights at gyms and swimming pools and women-only groups like Breeze cycling.

There's a photo of a man clearly sticking a knife into Bert's (or Ernie's) face on the BBC page. I'm outraged.

gray - Member

In a similar vein, if you went to that baker and said "I am a Jew. Please make me a cake that says 'Judaism is best, and Jesus was not the son of God'.", would you really think that the baker would be anti-Semitic if he declined?

Terrible analogy. It's like a jew asked them to bake a cake with a start of david and the word "Jews" on it and he refused because he doesn't like jews.

Surely we don't have legislation that compels people to participate in the promotion of something they think is wrong?

given that we also have things like women's only nights at gyms and swimming pools and women-only groups like Breeze cycling.

In a similar vein, if you went to that baker and said "I am a Jew. Please make me a cake that says 'Judaism is best, and Jesus was not the son of God'.", would you really think that the baker would be anti-Semitic if he declined?

Terrible analogy. It's like a jew asked them to bake a cake with a start of david and the word "Jews" on it and he refused because he doesn't like jews.

I don't think the analogy is that bad - the key thing is that he was being asked to bake a cake that clearly promotes something which his belief system tells him is morally wrong.

I think that you've missed (or disagree with) the point that there is a big difference between refusing to do a particular job because one doesn't like the job, and refusing to do work for a person due to some daft discriminatory reason. I personally think that if a jew asked them to bake a cake with a start of david and the word "Jews" on it and he refused because he doesn't like jews, then it would be appropriate to say "you cannot refuse on the grounds that you don't like jews". However, if he refused on the grounds that he doesn't want to take part in the promotion of religions other than his own, then fair enough!

I feel so sorry for normal Christians. Most of them are Not Like That, but the only ones you ever hear about are the sort of hate-filled lunatics who think that Jesus told them not to bake homocakes.

😐

given that we also have things like women's only nights at gyms and swimming pools and women-only groups like Breeze cycling.

And girls joining scouts, women joining rotary but no boys joining guides or men joining the WI. A 'refuge' for girls/women still exists but not the other way around. Not convinced that a gender refuge isn't a bad thing sometimes.

Oh and on the subject of clubs discriminating against women etc., hopefully the very idea of having to force them to be inclusive will be daft before too long.

True, but that's slightly more nuanced given that we also have things like women's only nights at gyms and swimming pools and women-only groups like Breeze cycling.

Indeed. In practice though, I think there is generally a pretty obvious distinction between "special event to encourage people who otherwise feel excluded / daunted or something" as a positive thing to include people, and "we don't want your sort here" exclusions.

I've never tried homocake. I wonder what it tastes like? 😛
I'm homocake curious.

In practice though, I think there is generally a pretty obvious distinction...

Obvious maybe, but tricky to capture in law.
Golf clubs etc are allowed to be Men Only because these groups are allowed to Women Only.
I'm not sure either is inherently wrong, but the golf club one seems less fair some reason.

And the women's groups are not just about inclusion: Breeze North East organised a supported C2C ride that I quite wanted to go on, but I was excluded on the basis of my unsightly genitals.