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

[boxman2000]

Imagine a different scenario.

A baker refuses to put on a cake, a black groom and a white bride, or vice versa.

Is this acceptable?

Absolutely not, no.

That would be a bigoted view based on nothing found in the bible. Homosexuality is a subject clearly covered in scripture. Apples and oranges.

Again, it isn't about the persons sexuality, but about the political
Slogan on the cake. Same sex marriage is illegal in Northern Ireland and I think people are forgetting or don't realise that.

Thank you - the point I was trying to make earlier which most missed I think.

 

[TheLegendOfMart]

Not to say I wouldn't try and deride them for their views, as it's pretty hard to back up racist views with "but my religion", but it'd be for my own amusing more than because I was feeling hurt or anything.

I'm not even saying people shouldn't be upset or offended by people treating them this way, I'm just outlining my views on the situation and how I would deal with it.

I'm pretty sure people did say "but my religion" back when there was segregation and interracial marriage was illegal.

I am in no way equating the struggles of black people to that of being gay but it staggers me when people of other races are either indifferent or against other minorities telling them just to "go somewhere else" and to "shut up and deal with it".

If other races just "went somewhere else" and "shut up and dealt with it" in the past the world would be a very different place.

Absolutely not, no.

That would be a bigoted view based on nothing found in the bible. Homosexuality is a subject clearly covered in scripture. Apples and oranges.


Thank you - the point I was trying to make earlier which most missed I think.

The bible also says that you can own slaves as long as they are from neighboring nations, that you can kill someone for working on the sabbath, that eating shellfish is an abomination, that you can't approach the altar of god if you have defected sight, etc.. etc..

Should we take those things seriously, if not why not?

 

[RDM]

Absolutely not, no.

That would be a bigoted view based on nothing found in the bible. Homosexuality is a subject clearly covered in scripture. Apples and oranges.

So as long as your bigotry can be backed up by scripture we are all good?

 

[Energize]

The bakery should have the right to refuse to make any cake based on any aspect of it's design for any reason. The whole situation is a farce.

 

[boxman2000]

The bible also says that you can own slaves as long as they are from neighboring nations, that you can kill someone for working on the sabbath, that eating shellfish is an abomination, that you can't approach the altar of god if you have defected sight, etc.. etc..

Should we take those things seriously, if not why not?

Well those things are typically quoted by people who don't understand the bible to be fair. Slavery was different in biblical times as were the social and political aspects at the time compared to now whereby most of the slaves spoken of in the bible were prisoners of war.

I would encourage you to read this on slavery, it's short, to the point and covers most of what I would say on the subject.

Regarding the points you made on the sabbath and shellfish etc, the key to understanding this issue is knowing that the Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians. Some the laws were to reveal to the Israelites how to obey and please God (the 10 Commandments, e.g.) Some laws were to show the Israelites how to worship God and atone for sin (sacrificial system). Some of laws were intended to make the Israelites distinct from other nations (the food and clothing rules). As hard to believe as some of these laws were, remember that they were for the Israelites, not the Christian. This is the key here - none of the Old Testament law is binding on Christians today. When Jesus died on the cross, He put an end to the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23–25; Ephesians 2:15) because He fulfilled it, completely. That of course doesn't mean the Christian is to go around murdering or stealing but to follow the example of Jesus and follow His teachings - "I Am the Way" He said.

So as long as your bigotry can be backed up by scripture we are all good?

Call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact of what the bible says. I suggest you take it up with God as He wrote the bible, He'd give you a much better explanation than me.

It's like these tax avoidance schemes that are in the news at the moment; avoiding tax is illegal but people try and get around it by interpreting the law in a certain way, the law hasn't changed, avoidance remains illegal but the interpretation has which (to some) justifies the act of robbing the tax man... to little success now if press reports are correct (not the best analogy but slightly topical I guess).

 

[RDM]

Call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact of what the bible says. I suggest you take it up with God as He wrote the bible, He'd give you a much better explanation than me.

Sadly it seems that God is being quite quiet on the issue.

 

[wndsr]

Call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact of what the bible says. I suggest you take it up with God as He wrote the bible, He'd give you a much better explanation than me.

It's like these tax avoidance schemes that are in the news at the moment; avoiding tax is illegal but people try and get around it by interpreting the law in a certain way, the law hasn't changed, avoidance remains illegal but the interpretation has which (to some) justifies the act of robbing the tax man... to little success now if press reports are correct (not the best analogy but slightly topical I guess).

I should point out that tax avoidance is a perfectly legal use of tax laws to reduce ones tax burden.

Are you referring to tax evasion, which is illegal?

 

[elmarko]

Again, it isn't about the persons sexuality, but about the political
Slogan on the cake. Same sex marriage is illegal in Northern Ireland and I think people are forgetting or don't realise that.

But that's still not the issue, advocating to change the law to allow same sex marriage is perfectly legal.

What is illegal on the other hand appears to be denying services to another based on grounds prohibited by the discriminations act (ethnicity, religion or political views).

I think both parties should just shut up and stop whinging, because effectively it's two parties moaning that the other won't accept their views or beliefs.

This isn't a midway argument, this is the business owners being allowed to discriminate & break the law.

It's easy for those in a position of privilege to say 'Oh people should just stop complaining' when they are not the ones being discriminated against for holding political views or their sexuality.

 

[estebanrey]

Absolutely not, no.

That would be a bigoted view based on nothing found in the bible. Homosexuality is a subject clearly covered in scripture. Apples and oranges.

I'm not sure what Bible you've been reading but there are passages that condone racism (especially the bits about slavery) and sexuality is not 'clearly covered' as you claim.

There are literally a handful on lines that can be interpreted as being against homosexuality, but you're making out as if there is a whole chapter on how it is wrong to be gay.

There is far more scripture in the NT about loving other people for who they are than there is promoting discrimination.

What happened to 'turn the other cheek' and 'love they neighbour as one loves themself' (bible derived)?

 

[Castiel]

But that's still not the issue, advocating to change the law to allow same sex marriage is perfectly legal.

What is illegal on the other hand appears to be denying services to another based on grounds prohibited by the discriminations act (ethnicity, religion or political views

It is entirely the issue. No services were denied, they could still buy cakes from the shop, they simply retained their rightful discretion to not support a political issue. All companies and individuals have this right as we see in the Scottish Independence debate.

Are you actually saying that you can be forced to support a political campaign to change the law as it stands simply because that law affects a minority ?

 

[ElliorR]

What happened to 'turn the other cheek' and 'love they neighbour as one loves themself' (bible derived)?

We all know how selective people who use the bible to discriminate are with the content.I mean, how many of the readers who say homosexuality is wrong because the bible tells them so have actually sold their daughter (or second daughter, can't remember the verse) into slavery?

Saying that, I fully expect that most people with religious beliefs are decent people who understand the bible is allegorical and not literal but they are the silent majority where the nutjobs are the vocal minority.

 

[RDM]

Are you actually saying that you can be forced to support a political campaign to change the law as it stands simply because that law affects a minority ?

It does seem that in Northern Ireland you cannot deny services to someone based on political opinions.

I would also disagree that making a cake is supporting a political campaign, I do not for one moment believe that the baker who made my birthday cake did actually want to wish me a happy birthday.

 

[elmarko]

It is entirely the issue. No services were denied, they could still buy cakes from the shop, they simply retained their rightful discretion to not support a political issue. All companies and individuals have this right as we see in the Scottish Independence debate.

Are you actually saying that you can be forced to support a political campaign to change the law as it stands simply because that law affects a minority ?

A business transaction isn't the same as supporting a political campaign. A bus driver taking fifteen Conservative supporters to an event isn't supporting the Conservative party - there is no reason to bring in personal beliefs into a standard business transaction.

As long as what's being requested doesn't break the law, refusing on discriminatory grounds (which can include politics, sexuality or race) is not something the law in this case allows.

They offer a service making cakes, the second they start a business up for trading they agree to our collective rules & legislation - if they are unable to abide by these rules they should perhaps reconsider if the world of business is for them.

I simply disagree that baking a cake is an action of support to a political view (I also don't agree that equality is a political argument to begin with) they may not share. They are free to not support equal rights for gay marriage, their business on the other hand is not.

 

[wndsr]

A business transaction isn't the same as supporting a political campaign. A bus driver taking fifteen Conservative supporters to an event isn't supporting the Conservative party - there is no reason to bring in personal beliefs into a standard business transaction.

As long as what's being requested doesn't break the law, refusing on discriminatory grounds (which can include politics, sexuality or race) is not something the law in this case allows.

They offer a service making cakes, the second they start a business up for trading they agree to our collective rules & legislation - if they are unable to abide by these rules they should perhaps reconsider if the world of business is for them.

I simply disagree that baking a cake is an action of support to a political view (I also don't agree that equality is a political argument to begin with) they may not share. They are free to not support equal rights for gay marriage, their business on the other hand is not.

+1

 

[ElliorR]

A business transaction isn't the same as supporting a political campaign. A bus driver taking fifteen Conservative supporters to an event isn't supporting the Conservative party - there is no reason to bring in personal beliefs into a standard business transaction.

As long as what's being requested doesn't break the law, refusing on discriminatory grounds (which can include politics, sexuality or race) is not something the law in this case allows.

They offer a service making cakes, the second they start a business up for trading they agree to our collective rules & legislation - if they are unable to abide by these rules they should perhaps reconsider if the world of business is for them.

I simply disagree that baking a cake is an action of support to a political view (I also don't agree that equality is a political argument to begin with) they may not share. They are free to not support equal rights for gay marriage, their business on the other hand is not.

Whilst I agree with what you say I'll play devils advocate.

If a group wanted to promote a change in the law to allow sex with children, though until such a law existed they would never dream of doing so, and this campaign, whilst abhorrent to most people was legal, would it be unreasonable for a baker to refuse to ice a cake with "let us legally have sex with children" when he found the whole idea sickening?

 

[wndsr]

Whilst I agree with what you say I'll play devils advocate.

If a group wanted to promote a change in the law to allow sex with children, though until such a law existed they would never dream of doing so, and this campaign, whilst abhorrent to most people was legal, would it be unreasonable for a baker to refuse to ice a cake with "let us legally have sex with children" when he found the whole idea sickening?

Love the "how extreme can we make our examples" attitude here.

My view is the same. A business trades as a business, nothing more nothing less. A business does not pick and choose what work it wishes to take on based on the personal views of their employees.

 

[cheesyboy]

Whilst I agree with what you say I'll play devils advocate.

If a group wanted to promote a change in the law to allow sex with children, though until such a law existed they would never dream of doing so, and this campaign, whilst abhorrent to most people was legal, would it be unreasonable for a baker to refuse to ice a cake with "let us legally have sex with children" when he found the whole idea sickening?

That would be promoting harm to others, which is a bit different from a gay cake isn't it? Always nice to bring out the kiddy fiddling cliché in the gay thread though

 

[ElliorR]

That would be promoting harm to others, which is a bit different from a gay cake isn't it? Always nice to bring out the kiddy fiddling cliché in the gay thread though

The association is in your mind not mine so don't try and say otherwise. I am fully supportive of all anti discrimination laws and always have been. **** me, people like you look for hidden meaning in everything and project your own sick mind onto others.

 

[elmarko]

Whilst I agree with what you say I'll play devils advocate.

If a group wanted to promote a change in the law to allow sex with children, though until such a law existed they would never dream of doing so, and this campaign, whilst abhorrent to most people was legal, would it be unreasonable for a baker to refuse to ice a cake with "let us legally have sex with children" when he found the whole idea sickening?

What's being proposed is the allow & permit the exploitation of children (who are unable to give consent) which isn't all that different to requesting a cake saying "kill all black people" - essentially I'd bundle it in the same category as 'hate speech' as what's being proposed causes objective & measurable harm.

A more comparable one would be a person requesting a cake being baked in support of polygamy (which I'd also say should be protected), as much as I may not want to engage with it myself - between consenting adults there is no harm caused.

Promoting harm against others (such as hate speech against individual races, the removal of the protection which children have, equality for certain groups) should not only lack protection of the law it should be banned.

 

[cheesyboy]

The association is in your mind not mine so don't try and say otherwise. I am fully supportive of all anti discrimination laws and always have been. **** me, people like you look for hidden meaning in everything and project your own sick mind onto others.

Over and over again in the thread, people are bringing out promotion of acts of harm as a simile to a gay wedding cake. As if they are somehow on a similar level of moral standing. What point are you trying to make, exactly?