Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Faustus, Oct 10, 2018.
Indeed. Both sides acted objectionably.
Being able to out yourself as an ar****** is an important aspect of free speech - a benefit to everyone else.
You didn't read the story.
What Kedge said was correct. The baker said he would make the cake but not write the gay slogan on it.
If one bakers shop doesn't want to print it for whatever reason then go to another shop.
Nobody as a right to have a cake baked for them. If someone feels so passionate about it bake your own cake.
My position is that the bakers are okay to deny the request and give the reason as the customization which is what they have done. They cannot deny the sale based on sexuality but they can deny the sale for any number of reasons, including no reason at all or that it goes against the belief of the baker. The grey area is what you deem an acceptable belief while not being discriminatory to the customer. In this case the baker was not discriminating toward the customer.
I think the whole thing is stupid, the customer and baker. The customer should have understood that having them make the cake would make the customer feel like they are betraying their beliefs and the baker should have known that it is just a cake and a bit of icing. It is a shame it had to get to this point.
Would i call it a victory for free speech?
I would not. Stupid and expensive is what i would call the whole thing
I did read the story, you are just being pedantic because by baking the cake i inferred decorating it to the customers wishes. Just because the baker is a homophobic bigot doesn't mean he couldn't have just decorated the cake. No one forced the baker to accept the message.
For the record, I do believe any business can choose not to serve a customer, it is just clear in this case why the baker refused even though they were lucky and could claim it wasn't the customers sexuality. The baker hates gays and so denied service to a customer based on their sexuality, with a very convenient excuse.
I disagree that you read the story.
Or at least the parts which contradict that.
They didn't start this nonesense, queerspace is behind this absurd idea that refusal to put "support same sex marriage" some how made the individual feel a lesser person? utterly absurd imho, the person needs to grow up a bit more or grow a thicker skin as some might say, why didn't the customer simply move on and find business elsewhere?
One mans cake decorating service is another LGBTA hell i guess...................
Do not make the assumption I actually care, about the plight of a cake decorator with different views to that of a minority.
Call it what you like, they were backed by the Supreme Court. Simple as that.
I don’t believe any business should be able to chose not to serve a customer (at least not based on sexuality, race etc..) and that isn’t what happened here. It wasn’t a convenient excuse, the baker has stated several times they’d be happy to sell the customer a cake, the objection was the message. It’s not pedantic for someone to point it out it is literally the reason for the initial story and for the resulting judgement going in their favour.
You don’t know that the baker hates gays either, the baker objects to gay marriage, perhaps the baker thinks homosexuality is a sin too, that doesn’t imply that they hate gay people, especially given that the underlying reason is their own religious beliefs.
so? Plenty of court rulings and laws which are plain wrong. Section 28 in the UK comes to mind in the 80s and 90s.
he is selling a cake, not being forced at the end of a shotgun to marry anyone, gay or not.
So the point clearly isn't moot is it, the bakers didn't want to provide a cake with that message on it, the court ruling is such that they did nothing wrong.
As I said, you can call it what you like, they did nothing wrong in the eyes of the law.
I'm not really sure what your point is? Courts shouldn't bother with things unless people take it as far as threatening others with guns?
Suppose it was a catholic/republican baker being asked to make a cake in honour of the Queens birthday, complete with a picture of the Queen and some union jacks on it? Or alternatively perhaps it is a protestant/unionist baker being asked to bake a cake in honour of the Pope's birthday complete with a picture of the Pope and the Irish tricolour flag on it?
Or how about a muslim baker and the local atheists society would like a cake with their favourite cartoon characters - Jesus and Mo - does the muslim baker then need to make an image of the prophet so as not to, supposedly, discriminate against atheists? (I guess technically the comic character "Mo" is merely a lookalike but still)
The issue at hand isn't hating gays or anyone else, it is being able to turn down work that involves creating something you don't agree with. The bakers didn't turn down the customer they turned down a custom cake, this was obvious to anyone who paid attention when the story was broken 4 years ago - I made a thread on it 4 years ago in GD and pointed this out in the first post...
Sometimes the LGBLT community acts a bit like the Spanish Inquisition tbh.
A business is allowed to refuse business. At least that has now been backed up in court.
yes, it's the gays that are the ones oppressing everyone else, clearly.
It was always going to be difficult due to it not being a matter of rights but a conflict of rights. I personally believe that the bakers rights were less important in this but the supreme court believes otherwise.
Funny enough the ruling states everyones rights are equal...
You have the right to ask for your gay cake.
They have the equal right to decline your gay cake.
As everyones rights are equal, you have no right to force them to bake your gay cake.
Considering how their message is always saying how tolerant and inclusive they are, they can be very quick to become intolerant and abusive to people opposed to their views.
I'm not sure why you think there is a conflict re: rights?
What right do you believe was infringed re: the customer? The right to whatever custom product they wanted?
What would you think re: the other scenarios mentioned above - like the pope or queen cake? Or the Jesus and mo cake?
Separate names with a comma.