Bakers refuse Gay wedding cake - update: Supreme Court rules in favour of Bakers

[estebanrey]

they can claim its based on anything they like - the justification is irrelevant

It's not irrelevant if your defense is "I'm not homophobic, I just support the 'traditional' view of marriage" and your actions clearly don't support that stance consistently, it seems obvious your actual reasons are due to one of disliking gay people getting married an not a conservative protection of an established tradition.

You seem to keep forgetting that creating rules that either directly or indirectly affect certain groups (homosexuals, people of a certain gender, the disabled, racial groups etc) is against the law.

, its their view and that's all that matters - freedom of speech doesn't require justification for views you chose to express or not express

No the law is all that matters. Regardless of what you say, people are not corporations (are you Mitt Romney by the way?) they are entities owned and ran by people. As such they are subject to the discrimination laws of the land that individuals are not.

Also, refusing service to someone who wants a pro-gay marriage cake is not "freedom of speech", if anything it is denying the buyer theirs.

 

[RDM]

If you do support the legislation in its current form you still support inequality, as civil partnerships are still reserved for homosexuals and no one else. Not agreeing with gay marriage doesn't make you a bigot or guilty of discrimination.

No, that would be the previous legislation that was inequal. There is nothing inequal about the current legislation it just hasn't addressed the issues the previous legislation caused.

That inequality wouldn't exist if it had been done properly the first time, however some groups where quite voiciferous in their opposition so civil partnerships were a fudge to placate them...

 

[dowie]

But, as a company, it has to abide by different laws in certain circumstances. The anti discrimination laws apply to businesses not people. As long as I am not inciting hatred I can be as homophobic as I like, I can't however run a business in a homophobic manner.

Anti discrimination law applies to businesses discriminating against people. They haven't refused to serve any particular group of people.

There isn't a law that says you have to support any possible view regardless of your personal opinion... I think you're allowed to discriminate between opinions, views, political campaigns, symbols etc..etc.. as these things are not people - they're just 'things' and anti discrimination legislation doesn't exist to protect 'things' it exists to protect people.

And I can disagree with their stance and challenge it. Objectively I just cannot see the harm in gay marriage rights.

yes you can indeed... what you can't do is force your views on them or force them to support your views regardless of how sure you are that your view is right and how you can't objectively see anything wrong with your view

 

[Tombo]

Also, refusing service to someone who wants a pro-gay marriage cake is not "freedom of speech", if anything it is denying the buyer theirs.

It's not denying them freedom of speech, you can't ask someone to say something and then say you're being denied freedom of speech when they won't.

 

[estebanrey]

If you do support the legislation in its current form you still support inequality, as civil partnerships are still reserved for homosexuals and no one else. Not agreeing with gay marriage doesn't make you a bigot or guilty of discrimination.

I agree that civil partnerships should be available to heterosexuals, as does Stonewall the gay rights groups, but that's another matter.

However, I don't see how anyone who truly has no problem with whom someone chooses to love and wants to spend their life with can oppose gay marriage.

* Whether gay couples can call their partnership a marriage or not has no effect on the person opposing them or that person's union.

* The definition of marriage has been changed countless times over the centuries.

* By not agreeing with gay people getting married, you are saying that one type of consensual relationship should not be able to attain the same level of recognition as another.

So please explain how someone who holds the opinion that gay marriage is wrong is not ultimately basing their opinion on a negative view of homosexuality and how it is a discriminatory position.

 

[dowie]

It's not irrelevant if your defense is "I'm not homophobic, I just support the 'traditional' view of marriage" and your actions clearly don't support that stance consistently, it seems obvious your actual reasons are due to one of disliking gay people getting married an not a conservative protection of an established tradition.

it is still irrelevant, their state reasons are irrelevant - that is my point.... they could come out and say a green eyed monster told them gay marriage is wrong... its completely irrelevant - the only relevant point is that they disagreed with the message they were asked to create - the reason for the refusal/disagreement shouldn't matter - they should have the right to refuse to create work they disagree with

You seem to keep forgetting that creating rules that either directly or indirectly affect certain groups (homosexuals, people of a certain gender, the disabled, racial groups etc) is against the law.

I'm not forgetting anything... they've refused to support a stance supported by a certain group.. so what - just because a large number of people support something doesn't mean you have to.

No the law is all that matters. Regardless of what you say, people are not corporations (are you Mitt Romney by the way?) they are entities owned and ran by people. As such they are subject to the discrimination laws of the land that individuals are not.

Also, refusing service to someone who wants a pro-gay marriage cake is not "freedom of speech", if anything it is denying the buyer theirs.

its quite clearly an issue of freedom of speech for the same reason that say a newspaper (another company) can refuse to run an advert it disagrees with

 

[RDM]

Anti discrimination law applies to businesses discriminating against people. They haven't refused to serve any particular group of people.

There isn't a law that says you have to support any possible view regardless of your personal opinion... I think you're allowed to discriminate between opinions, views, political campaigns, symbols etc..etc.. as these things are not people - they're just 'things' and anti discrimination legislation doesn't exist to protect 'things' it exists to protect people.

Obviously the Equality Commission disagrees with you and does see it as discrimination against a protected group. It may not be direct discrimination but the law also protects against indirect discrimination.

A lot could hinge on exactly what the bakers said when cancelling the order, if they said "We cannot make this cake because we disagree with homosexuality" then they are effectively discriminating due to sexuality.

yes you can indeed... what you can't do is force your views on them or force them to support your views regardless of how sure you are that your view is right and how you can't objectively see anything wrong with your view

I am quite willing to accept any argument as to why it is right to deny gays equal marriage rights. So far no one seems to be able to make on though. Regardless I am not forcing them to change their views. However as a society we have decided that they cannot use those views to discriminate against people when running a business.

 

[estebanrey]

It's not denying them freedom of speech, you can't ask someone to say something and then say you're being denied freedom of speech when they won't.

Eh? The person who provides the design (i.e the customer) is the one making the proclamation, not one making the cake.

It is Gillette claiming their razors are the 'best a man can get' not the guy who directs the advert.

 

[dowie]

So please explain how someone who holds the opinion that gay marriage is wrong is not ultimately basing their opinion on a negative view of homosexuality and how it is a discriminatory position.

they are separate things ergo it is possible to not dislike homosexuality and still be opposed to gay marriage

some gay people oppose gay marriage - do they hate themselves?

 

[spudbynight]

I didn't say they could - I said they could take a stance on issues

they're not discriminating against which people they're serving they're choosing what work they will take on

Indeed, I am pretty confident that if I asked them to bake the same cake, I would be treated in exactly the same way.

Seems pretty fair to me.

 

[Tombo]

Eh? The person who provides the design (i.e the customer) is the one making the proclamation, not one making the cake.

It is Gillette claiming their razors are the 'best a man can get' not the guy who directs the advert.

The person making the cake still has to write it out though, they can't stop the customer saying it or writing it on themselves but they shouldn't have to if they don't agree with it.

Indeed, I am pretty confident that if I asked them to bake the same cake, I would be treated in exactly the same way.

Seems pretty fair to me.

That would be the sensible reaction, the cake maker doesn't want to put a message on a cake and I don't imagine anyone making a fuss if it was a straight man who was refused it.

 

[RDM]

Indeed, I am pretty confident that if I asked them to bake the same cake, I would be treated in exactly the same way.

Seems pretty fair to me.

In this instance it is the group being discriminated against rather than the individual.

 

[dowie]

Obviously the Equality Commission disagrees with you and does see it as discrimination against a protected group. It may not be direct discrimination but the law also protects against indirect discrimination.

well yes obviously they do - but are they always right? We'll have to see what happens... I really hope it doesn't succeed.

A lot could hinge on exactly what the bakers said when cancelling the order, if they said "We cannot make this cake because we disagree with homosexuality" then they are effectively discriminating due to sexuality.

they considered the order carefully then contacted the customer to refuse it and refund them I think they've likely been tactful when doing so

I am quite willing to accept any argument as to why it is right to deny gays equal marriage rights. So far no one seems to be able to make on though. Regardless I am not forcing them to change their views. However as a society we have decided that they cannot use those views to discriminate against people when running a business.

I'm not interested in denying gays marriage rights... but that's completely irrelevant to the thread - I don't have to justify some other person's opinion to say that I support their right to have that opinion. Maybe its simply because their Jesus book says marriage is between man and woman and they think therefore Gay people should have a similar arrangement but called something else... who knows - it doesn't matter really... they have views/beliefs and shouldn't be forced to support other views/beliefs they're opposed to.

 

[dowie]

In this instance it is the group being discriminated against rather than the individual.

no it isn't - its message supporting a view, political stance, campaign

lots of people from a particular group and from other groups support it... its a campaign that affects a particular group - its still a view/stance

 

[estebanrey]

it is still irrelevant, their state reasons are irrelevant - that is my point.... they could come out and say a green eyed monster told them gay marriage is wrong... its completely irrelevant - the only relevant point is that they disagreed with the message they were asked to create - the reason for the refusal/disagreement shouldn't matter - they should have the right to refuse to create work they disagree with

Of course it should matter. "Sorry but I can't make the cake you want today because we've run out of brown icing but can provide it in a couple of days time" is massively different to "Sorry but I refuse to make a cake that depicts ethnic minorities on it".

And no they shouldn't have the right to deny a service if it contradicts the law on discrimination.

Whilst in a big city it is easy to just go to another shop, the same isn't true in a small village where there may be only one bakery.

I'm not forgetting anything... they've refused to support a stance supported by a certain group.. so what - just because a large number of people support something doesn't mean you have to.

How is making a cake 'supporting a stance'? It's just fulfilling an order. Would the bakery turn down a cake that said "Liverpool Will Win The League This Year" if the owner thought it was unlikely, of course they wouldn't.

its quite clearly an issue of freedom of speech for the same reason that say a newspaper (another company) can refuse to run an advert it disagrees with

But a newspaper can't refuse to take an advert if by doing so they are discriminating against a protected group.

 

[Castiel]

So please explain how someone who holds the opinion that gay marriage is wrong is not ultimately basing their opinion on a negative view of homosexuality and how it is a discriminatory position.

Why do I have to explain that? Its immaterial what I think, I support gay marriage, in fact I was at one recently.

The point is that you do not have to be homophobic to not support gay marriage, for all you know they may think that it is discriminatory in itself due to the double standard of equality in marriage, but not in Civil Partnerships.

Not wanting to produce a political slogan should not be subject to discrimination charges, if they refused to sell the cake because they were homosexual that's different, but they didn't...if I asked for such a cake I would be refused as well. The on,y thing I can see the bakery did wrong was to accept a contract and then refuse it later. Once they accepted it, they should have honoured it despite their political misgivings.

 

[dowie]

Eh? The person who provides the design (i.e the customer) is the one making the proclamation, not one making the cake.

oh that's OK then Abdul's printers will be happy to help the BNP print the fliers after all....

 

[Castiel]

But a newspaper can't refuse to take an advert if by doing so they are discriminating against a protected group.

Yes that can...a newspaper can refuse to advertise or promote any political issue they choose.

 

[estebanrey]

I'm not interested in denying gays marriage rights... but that's completely irrelevant to the thread - I don't have to justify some other person's opinion to say that I support their right to have that opinion. Maybe its simply because their Jesus book says marriage is between man and woman and they think therefore Gay people should have a similar arrangement but called something else... who knows - it doesn't matter really... they have views/beliefs and shouldn't be forced to support other views/beliefs they're opposed to.

But the Bible doesn't say that.

 

[Tombo]

But the Bible doesn't say that.

His point is that it doesn't matter why they believe that so it also doesn't matter whether it says that or not, following his argument.