same sex marridge cake

  • This topic has 272 replies, 67 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by  mt.
Viewing 40 posts - 201 through 240 (of 273 total)
  • same sex marridge cake
  • Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    (Does it make any difference if it is genetic? I don’t think, for instance, that it’s okay to discriminate against disabled people that were born disabled but not those who became disabled in later life, or vice versa)

    So what you are saying is that people consciously choose to be gay? Which is why, throughout history, despite the stigma , persecution and repression, certain people seem to think, ‘hey same sex relationships, that sounds fun’….

    Premier Icon Cougar
    Subscriber

    the scientific jury is still very much out

    Good, I’m glad they don’t have to hide their sexuality any more.

    In seriousness; the “scientific jury” (whoever the chuff that is) can be as out as they like. Gay, straight, bi, something else: you don’t choose who you fancy, you don’t choose what pushes your buttons. You don’t go to work one day and think “you know, I think I’ll start fancying Claire in Accounts.” You don’t choose to prefer blondes, or Thai girls, or willy. You just do, it’s part of who you are.

    Whether they’ve isolated the ‘gay gene’ or not yet is neither here nor there. Ask yourself this; could you choose to be gay? Think you could give it a go for a bit?

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    Which is why, throughout history, despite the stigma , persecution and repression, certain people seem to think, ‘hey same sex relationships, that sounds fun’….

    Bit like Christians then…? 😉

    Think you could give it a go for a bit?

    I believe ninfan suggested he had tried the salami earlier, but it go deleted by one of those nasty mod types 🙂

    ninfan
    Member

    But theres a clear element of homophobia in that argument – The whole “gays can’t help being that way” approach is reminiscent of the old view of homosexuality as a form of psychiatric illness. The implication that gay people would be straight, if only they could!

    Cynthia Nixon spoke out about this whole thing a while ago:

    “I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line ‘I’ve been straight and I’ve been gay, and gay is better.’ And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice. I understand that for many people it’s not, but for me it’s a choice, and you don’t get to define my gayness for me. A certain section of our community is very concerned that it not be seen as a choice, because if it’s a choice, then we could opt out. I say it doesn’t matter if we flew here or we swam here, it matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not.” Her face was red and her arms were waving. “As you can tell,” she said, “I am very annoyed about this issue. Why can’t it be a choice? Why is that any less legitimate? It seems we’re just ceding this point to bigots who are demanding it, and I don’t think that they should define the terms of the debate. I also feel like people think I was walking around in a cloud and didn’t realize I was gay, which I find really offensive. I find it offensive to me, but I also find it offensive to all the men I’ve been out with.”

    I believe ninfan suggested he had tried the salami earlier, but it go deleted by one of those nasty mod types

    It hasn’t been deleted.

    The ‘gene’ question is irrelevant, a red herring even? Surely adults are free agents in their personal affairs – free to love, shag, marry, date or leave whomever they choose, and for their own reasons? We all fall somewhere along a spectrum of sexual orientation including gender identity and sexual preference. For example, many people are bisexual, they often get discriminated against by both homosexuals and heterosexuals!

    Edukator
    Member

    Does it matter why people are gay? I think not. There’s no objective reason to discriminate against gays whatever the reason they are gay. It takes an illogical reason such as religious dogma. But are we prepared to discriminate against the religious dogma that results in the discrimination.

    ninfan
    Member

    Surely adults are be free to love, shag, marry, date or leave whomever they choose, and for their own reasons?

    Agree completely

    Thing is, they should also be free to believe in magical sky fairies and old fiction books, and have those beliefs respected as well.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    But are we prepared to discriminate against the religious dogma that results in the discrimination.

    Yes. As said earlier, we already “discriminate” by telling them they can’t keep slaves or burn people to death, regardless of what the Good Book says.

    konabunny
    Member

    “Going into a halal butchers and ordering bacon is harassment,”

    Ahahahahhahahahahhahahagahaggagaga. Ahagagahah. Hahahahahga. Oh, dear me. Ha ha ha. <wipes tear from eye> eeehh <chuckles>

    “as a society we have decided that being gay isn’t wrong”

    That’s not right. The position is that whether being gay is right or wrong isn’t an issue the state should regulate, and it’s not something that should be addressed (in most circumstances) in business either. The baker is still free to think that being gay is wrong, just like he is entitled to think that being a Catholic/Prod is wrong or being an adulterer is wrong.

    Premier Icon kennyp
    Subscriber

    From looking at the case it seems the folk ordering the cake have gone out of their way to deliberately provoke this row in order to get a business whose views they don’t agree with to be taken to court. Loads of other places they could have had their cake made.

    No question that gay folk have been treated very badly in the past but that doesn’t excuse intolerance and vindictiveness now going the other way.

    As for businesses in general, it should be up to them who they do business with. If they want to turn customers away that might be commercial silliness, but in a free country that should be their right. They aren’t stopping the buyer taking his business elsewhere.

    Agree completely

    Thing is, they should also be free to believe in magical sky fairies and old fiction books, and have those beliefs respected as well.

    I’m not talking about beliefs being respected, just the basic human right/freedom of consenting adults to relate with each other without being systematically attacked, marginalized or humiliated for it. You could believe (say) that a magical floating invisible teapot tells you to publically condemn all lesbians and gays and hang a male goat on Wednesdays … but why should your belief be automatically respected? Respect your right to believe what you will, but *respect* your beliefs? On what grounds?

    Junkyard
    Member

    that doesn’t excuse intolerance and vindictiveness now going the other way.

    How are they victimising them – they asked them to make them a cake when they are a cake shop

    As for businesses in general, it should be up to them who they do business with.

    You may wish to check thelaw there. they cannot put a sign saying no blacks for example.

    If they want to turn customers away that might be commercial silliness, but in a free country that should be their right.

    See above – its a country with laws they need to obey they are not free to ignore them anymore than I am free to burn their shops to the ground [ I have no intention of doing this but you get the point]

    They aren’t stopping the buyer taking his business elsewhere.

    Has anyone said they are doing this? They are refusing theor business because they are gay…..that is not legal

    Premier Icon kennyp
    Subscriber

    How are they victimising them

    By taking them to court, possibly resulting in criminal records, loss of business and redundancies. That strikes me as victimising people because of their beliefs.

    Edukator
    Member

    As a business man I used to turn bad business away, perfectly legal. I made absolutely sure I never turned away business if in doing so I could have been accused of discrimination as defined in EU law. This sometimes meant “positive discrimination” as I did business with people whom I would normally have refused as bad business but would have risked being accused of discrimination had I done so.

    Sometimes discrimination law have have bizarre consequences. It’s better than no discrimination law at all though.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Oh well i guess you will need to forgive them then

    “Going into a halal butchers and ordering bacon is harassment,”

    Though I can think of a few contextual situations where that would be absolutely true. “Oi, what about some baaacon eh? You love that don’tyaaarghh! Make sure you wipe yer hands on that tea towel, or is that yer ‘eadgear, eh?”

    Walking in innocently and ordering bacon by mistake would not be one of them, agreed.

    Sancho
    Member

    Dude from the Equality commission got owned on the BBC tonight.

    But I agree that its wrong to discrimnate but we all have the freedom to choose who we associate with and in the same way do business with.
    I (as a shop owner) have told people to F right off for being ignorant insulting douche bags and it is my right to choose not to do business with them.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    From looking at the case it seems the folk ordering the cake have gone out of their way to deliberately provoke this row in order to get a business whose views they don’t agree with to be taken to court.

    Why do people keep pointing this out as if it is an insightful revelation? The guy that ordered the cake was a gay rights activist and the cake had a gay rights campaign logo on it. Yes, it was obviously a targeted attempt to raise the issue and cause the row.

    Personally I don’t think that challenging bigots qualifies as “intolerance” or “vindictiveness” but YMMV.

    As for businesses in general, it should be up to them who they do business with.

    Nope, the law says otherwise.

    Would you be happy to see businesses display “No Blacks, No Irish” signs for instance?

    Edit: typing too slow. Others have made the point. I’m off to bed.

    Junkyard
    Member

    agree that its wrong to discrimnate but we all have the freedom to choose who we associate with and in the same way do business with.

    You may wish that to be the case but it is not
    You cannot have a whites only business if you want one.

    Basically they want different things so pick which right you support

    The right to be treated equally or the right to discriminate against people

    it is not a dilemma for me tbh

    Premier Icon kennyp
    Subscriber

    Just spoke to a pal who is gay to see what he thought. His opinion was that they should just have gone elsewhere (“it’s only a bloody cake” were his exact words) and that he reckoned the people taking the court action were an embarrassment to the people who fought for genuine gay rights.

    He had no problem with people not agreeing with his lifestyle and figured if the worst he was going to face in terms of discrimination was having to find an alternative bakers he was probably able to live with that.

    From looking at the case it seems the folk ordering the cake have gone out of their way to deliberately provoke this row in order to get a business whose views they don’t agree with to be taken to court. Loads of other places they could have had their cake made.

    I still reckon that the bigger picture here is to provoke a larger debate. In April, Stormont rejected a Sinn Fèin motion to legalise gay marriage, with unionists, chiefly the DUP voting against the motion, and Sinn Féin and Alliance (bar two) voting for. NI remains the last part of the UK where same-sex marriage is still not legal. It no coincidence that the Christian Institute has stepped in so quickly here, and is supporting the McArthurs (who got the name for their bakery business from a verse in Genesis). Who knows how closely connected the McArthurs are connected with the CI…

    If LGBT equality campaigners are aware that a business the size of Ashers is openly refusing to serve people because of their sexuality, then it’s fair game as far as I’m concerned. Time after time, the DUP has to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. All it ever wants to say is “No.” By hook or by crook, I’m more than happy for them to be dragged there yet again.

    This is a an extract from wiki, describing the first minister, Peter Robinson’s wife’s, who was also an MLA, approach to homosexuality:

    In June 2008, shortly after a physical assault on a homosexual man in Northern Ireland, she made comments on the BBC Radio Ulster’s Stephen Nolan Show offering to recommend homosexuals to psychiatric counselling.[24] While condemning the attack,[25] she called homosexuality an “abomination” that made her feel “sick” and “nauseous”, and offered to refer homosexuals to a psychiatrist she knew. In a subsequent interview, Robinson defended her views and denied prejudice against homosexuals, saying that “just as a murderer can be redeemed by the blood of Christ, so can a homosexual…. If anyone takes issue, they’re taking issue with the word of God”.[26] Her comments were rebuffed by representatives of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Rainbow Project, the Alliance Party,[27] Sinn Féin,[28] and the Social Democratic and Labour Party.[29][30] The psychiatrist in question, Dr. Paul Miller later resigned as her adviser and stood down from his post of consultant psychiatrist at Belfast’s Mater hospital. He is no longer a consultant psychiatrist within the NHS and has been reported to the General Medical Council (GMC).[31][32] A police investigation followed these comments, over 100 complaints were made,[33][34][35] and gay rights activist Robert Toner also made a complaint to the Equality Commission.[33][36][37][38]

    Robinson subsequently repeated her views in parliamentary session. Speaking in a 17 June 2008 Northern Ireland Grand Committee session on Risk Assessment and Management of Sex Offenders, she said: “There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children”[39] She reiterated her statement to the Belfast Telegraph on 21 June 2008,[40] but later stated that she had been “misrepresented” in Hansard.[41] This statement was challenged when Alliance Party Executive Director Gerry Lynch confirmed with Hansard staff that Robinson’s comments were in fact correctly quoted.[42] Further controversy was caused on 17 July 2008 when on the Stephen Nolan Show Robinson stated “it is the government’s responsibility to uphold God’s law”.[43] In the Northern Ireland Assembly on 30 June 2008, in a discussion about “LGBT Groups: Mental-Health Needs”, Robinson said that “Homosexuality, like all sin, is an abomination”, and suggested that teenagers needed help deciding whether they were homosexual or heterosexual.[44][45] During this period, Robinson herself was having an extra-marital affair with a 19-year old man.[46]

    If you are LGBT in Northern Ireland, this is the kind of thing you have to listen to elected representatives saying. It’s no wonder that businesses like Ashers are being targeted. They deserve it.

    ……..and figured if the worst he was going to face in terms of discrimination was having to find an alternative bakers he was probably able to live with that.

    Commonsense…….how quaint, amusing, and out of place, it sometimes seems to be.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    They are refusing their business because they are gay…..that is not legal

    This is simply not true (well, not as the story has been reported at any rate)

    They refused to supply a specific cake with a specific message on it – they did not refuse to do business with a particular person or type of persons – just supply a particular bespoke product. This is a totally different thing. For all we know they could have happily supplied them with thousands of off-the-shelf fairy cakes or a bespoke cake with a benign message on it – just not one with a missive they found abhorrent to their religious views. A message supporting same sex marriage that is not actually legal where this incident happened.

    A non religious or sexual orientation alternative:-

    A black man walks into a cake shop and is turned away from buying a cake, any cake = discriminatory. Plain and simple.

    A black (or white, makes no odds) man walks into a cake shop and orders the baker to make him a cake with a picture of President Obama on it and the message “Black Power”. The baker refuses = bigoted, yes; racist, yes; discriminatory, no. I guess it could be discriminatory to the cake, but not the person. He is refusing to make the cake, not serve the person.

    I can’t begin to understand the thinking of the baker because I don’t share his religious beliefs so the refusal makes no sense to me; but that still does not mean he discriminated by outright refusing to do business with a gay man; he just refused to make him what he wanted.

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    So, question for the folks who think “just go elsewhere, there’s other cake shops” is the answer. At what point are there enough cake shops that it’s OK for some to turn away the pink pound? Is it OK as long as 90% will serve you? 50%? 1%?

    If there’s only 1 cake shop in town, does that mean they don’t have the right to choose who they serve, because people can’t just go elsewhere?? What if there’s 2 cake shops and they’re both run by homophobes? Do they have to take turns?

    Might sound like hypotheticals but as soon as you get into “fine as long as” you get into this too. And where we are now isn’t some perfect post-equal-rights world, the same sliding scales apply- if you say “there’s no need for such an aggressive approach any more”, where is that cutoff?

    konabunny
    Member

    They refused to supply a specific cake with a specific message on it – they did not refuse to do business with a particular person or type of persons – just supply a particular bespoke product.

    “It’s not that we don’t serve Catholics, it’s just that we don’t make confirmation cakes”.

    From looking at the case it seems the folk ordering the cake have gone out of their way to deliberately provoke this row in order to get a business whose views they don’t agree with to be taken to court. Loads of other places they could have had their cake made.

    I don’t know why those Freedom Riders bothered getting on buses and riding around, demanding to be served lunch or to watch films. There were plenty of other places they could have eaten.

    dbcooper
    Member

    The right to be treated equally or the right to discriminate against people

    it is not a dilemma for me tbh

    This ^

    Very difficult.

    Petty minded bigots who selectively pick from the many nasty bits of the OT to decide who they hate…

    But arguments about cake may seem petty until one decides where people can draw the line about what is acceptable “choice” for a business or person.

    Could I, as a GP, refuse to treat certain sexual problems, people with certain sexualities or religions?

    At the very least, I’d like all businesses with this kind of ethic to display a Fish sign so I can choose to take my money elsewhere… But we know that after centuries of judging and discriminating against people on grounds of religious belief, some Christians aren’t so happy to see the same happen to them. Even in the squeals of “militancy” and unfairness we see here when some have their views challenged…

    Pragmatically, I think that if you open a business, you don’t get to discriminate in this way, unless you are asked to do something illegal or which is a lie.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Kenny I just spoke to a christian friend and they said the christians should be more christian and said its only a bloody cake and that the christians were an embarrassment to christians and not a good example of gods love or christinaity.

    We are both very lucky to have a “friend” who can speak agree with us arent we 🙄

    Even if your comments are true all it shows is that homosexuals, like heterosexuals, dont all agree on this issue.

    Its not news and they no more speak for all homosexuals than you or I speak for all heterosexuals.

    Bloody Hell DD those views are shocking…worse than child abuse 😯

    display a Fish sign so I can choose to take my money elsewhere… But we know that after centuries of judging and discriminating against people on grounds of religious belief, some Christians aren’t so happy to see the same happen to them

    Indeed that is the terrible thing they want the right for them to discriminate based on their special book but we cannot discriminate against them because they believe the special book and the big giant sky fairy.

    Millenium Falcon cake available for Jedi Warrior Marrideggdes

    Mr Woppit
    Member

    christians. They don’t like it uppem.

    ninfan
    Member

    Could I, as a GP, refuse to treat certain sexual problems, people with certain sexualities or religions?

    To be fair, doctors can refuse to offer or provide certain services to patients on the basis that it conflicts with their own personal belief or conscience…

    ransos
    Member

    But theres a clear element of homophobia heterophobia in that argument – The whole “gays straights can’t help being that way” approach is reminiscent of the old view of homosexuality heterosexuality as a form of psychiatric illness. The implication that gay straight people would be straight gay, if only they could!

    footflaps
    Member

    I just spoke to a Gay Christian friend and he said ‘It’s only a bloody cake, kill them all!!!!!’.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Ninfan- moving the goal posts they cannot do what they said
    they can deny doing certain treatments to EVERYONE – big difference and my bold

    From the BMA
    http://bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/ethics/expressions-of-doctors-beliefs

    *doctors should have a right to conscientiously object to participation in abortion, fertility treatment and the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, where there is another doctor willing to take over the patient’s care;
    *doctors should be able to request that arrangements are made to accommodate their conscientious objection to participating in other medical procedures, provided that patients are not disadvantaged. All requests should be considered on their merits;
    *doctors should not claim a conscientious objection to treating particular patients or groups of patients;
    *doctors should not share their private moral views with patients unless explicitly invited to do so;
    *doctors should ensure that any manifestation of their religious or cultural beliefs (such as clothing or other religious icons) do not impact negatively upon the therapeutic relationship

    They do have to safeguard the patient so they cannot refuse to treat someone who is gay or a Muslim or whatever as you appeared to suggest.

    PS Just noticed the time Kenny P posted – quote lucky your “gay friend” was up at midnight for a quick chat about the cake issue.

    Mr Woppit
    Member

    There’s a video somewhere of a street voxpop asking people who think that being gay is a “lifestyle choice” (incredibly, mostly christians): “So, how old were you when you decided to be straight?”

    Hilarious watching the respondents almost chewing off their own tongues, trying to think of an answer.

    Laugh? I nearly crossed the aisle…

    It is American though, and they are not representative of general intelligence levels.

    konabunny
    Member

    Well, I just spoke spoke to my friend who’s a gay Catholic baker who’s a member of the Orange Order, and he says “nye surrender”. Unfortunately, he wouldn’t elaborate further so I’m not sure to whom he refuses to surrender.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Too stereotypes ?

Viewing 40 posts - 201 through 240 (of 273 total)

The topic ‘same sex marridge cake’ is closed to new replies.