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

dowie · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:36

tbyeah said:
Manufacturing doesn't equal endorsement.

If they will refuse to take requests in that manner, they need to look into a different line of work.

Agreed it doesn't necessarily... however it could be seen as providing material support... more importantly refusal to create/produce can easily be seen as not endorsing/opposing. That's the main point - they oppose the idea (not the customer) they refuse to create something supporting/endorsing that idea.

This is no different to a printer refusing a flier or a newspaper/other company refusing advertising.

The problem is that the idea relates to a particular group - it's not a fundamental part of that group's identity but it's something a majority of that group supports. That's where opposing that idea is being seen as discriminating against that group. While you could argue that the regusal of NI to marry gays is itself discriminatory(I'm pretty sure it is) I don't believe that refusal to support/decision to oppose the campaign is. That's simply a freedom of speech/freedom of expression issue.

spoffle · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:38

wndsr said:
I don't agree. Whilst this case may be specifically about a gay themed cake, as far as I'm concerned it represents something that I don't believe in - a business picking and choosing what work to undertake based on the personal beliefs of individuals.

Whilst individuals are free to pick and choose who to associate with and do business with, a business itself is not.

On the flipside, should they be forced to make a cake they don't feel comfortable making? It's a bit of swings and roundabouts here. Personally, I wouldn't want a business making something for me that they didn't want to do, because you're not going to be getting their best effort (at least I wouldn't expect it to be) so it'd be better for all parties involved to just go elsewhere to find a bakery that will do the cake you want.

anything I don't mind · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:38

They even compare the plight of gays to the struggle slaves had, well milliband does, i heard it in one his speeches. Yep someone refusing to make you a cake is oppression of the worst kind, makes a life time of manual labour and beatings seem insignificant next to the discrimination these gays have to put with. I think the cake maker should be put to death for crimes against humanity, anyone agree?

Dis86 · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:40

wndsr said:
I don't agree. Whilst this case may be specifically about a gay themed cake, as far as I'm concerned it represents something that I don't believe in - a business picking and choosing what work to undertake based on the personal beliefs of individuals.

Whilst individuals are free to pick and choose who to associate with and do business with, a business itself is not.

So suddenly the individuals that make up that business have to give up their morals and beliefs and cater to every persons whims? Are you saying people should be forced to do things they don't want to do and disagree with?
If I ran a cake shop and someone came in saying they wanted a cake with the slogan 'Saville was innocent' I'd say no he wasn't and tell them to go away. You're saying I should be forced to write that.

Why didn't the individuals buying the cake just go to another ******* cake shop instead of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's pathetic.

RDM · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:45

Dis86 said:
So suddenly the individuals that make up that business have to give up their morals and beliefs and cater to every persons whims? Are you saying people should be forced to do things they don't want to do and disagree with?
If I ran a cake shop and someone came in saying they wanted a cake with the slogan 'Saville was innocent' I'd say no he wasn't and tell them to go away. You're saying I should be forced to write that.

Why didn't the individuals buying the cake just go to another ******* cake shop instead of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's pathetic.

70s Television presenters aren't a protected group...

Your ire about making a fuss is also somewhat misdirected, most of the fuss and press attention is being sought by the baker.

Businesses thankfully do not have human rights, the last thing we need is to go down that path.

Jarrastafari · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:48

Wasted so much of my morning reading pages of strange, confusing, cringe-worth and sometimes funny views. Here's my bit for what it's worth; all cakes are gay, surprise!

wndsr · 11 Jul 2014 at 10:49

spoffle said:
On the flipside, should they be forced to make a cake they don't feel comfortable making? It's a bit of swings and roundabouts here. Personally, I wouldn't want a business making something for me that they didn't want to do, because you're not going to be getting their best effort (at least I wouldn't expect it to be) so it'd be better for all parties involved to just go elsewhere to find a bakery that will do the cake you want.

Dis86 said:
So suddenly the individuals that make up that business have to give up their morals and beliefs and cater to every persons whims? Are you saying people should be forced to do things they don't want to do and disagree with?
If I ran a cake shop and someone came in saying they wanted a cake with the slogan 'Saville was innocent' I'd say no he wasn't and tell them to go away. You're saying I should be forced to write that.

Why didn't the individuals buying the cake just go to another ******* cake shop instead of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's pathetic.

I reiterate that it wasn't the individuals buying the cake who went to the press on this - it was the business owners.

I'm not saying they give up their beliefs and morals, but while they are working they are doing tasks for the business, not for themselves. As far as I'm concerned it's the same as people in supermarkets deciding they are unable to handle certain goods because it's against their religion - I don't agree with it at all.

Orcish-Horde · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:03

Dis86 said:
Why didn't the individuals buying the cake just go to another ******* cake shop instead of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's pathetic.

The individual may shop there on a regular basis, if your doing business on a regular basis, why go to another bakery?

jcr · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:05

wndsr said:
I reiterate that it wasn't the individuals buying the cake who went to the press on this - it was the business own

After the homos went crying to the equality commission

dowie · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:07

RDM said:
70s Television presenters aren't a protected group...

Your ire about making a fuss is also somewhat misdirected, most of the fuss and press attention is being sought by the baker.

Businesses thankfully do not have human rights, the last thing we need is to go down that path.

'Gay marriage' isn't a protected group, the campaign group for it isn't a protected group... these might be things lots of members of a protected group support... which is why we've seen the knee jerk reaction over this but it's again refusing a product/idea not refusing a customer.

Businesses do have a right to endorse/refuse to endorse things - you've had plenty of examples if this already... Castel for example and his transport company's position on advertising, Raymond and his photography policy... some printers refuse some political fliers, some newspapers refuse advertising....

They could refuse to create any cake using the colour green if they wanted to... that's entirely their choice as a business.

wndsr · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:08

jcr said:
After the homos went crying to the equality commission

Why do you have to word it in such a rude way?

They have every right to complain if they feel they have been discriminated against. The Equality Commission could have dismissed their complaints if they felt it was unfounded.

Schlong&Stable · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:11

wndsr said:
Why do you have to word it in such a rude way?

They have every right to complain if they feel they have been discriminated against. The Equality Commission could have dismissed their complaints if they felt it was unfounded.

The commission have a vested interest in finding problems in equality, so the chances are they'll tend to be on the side of the complainant.

We need to get rid of not only the commission, but all equality laws relating to who a business can serve. Let the free-market determine the future of those businesses which will not provide particular products or services.

TheBDog · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:14

Thompson_NCL said:
The commission have a vested interest in finding problems in equality, so the chances are they'll tend to be on the side of the complainant.

We need to get rid of not only the commission, but all equality laws relating to who a business can serve. Let the free-market determine the future of those businesses which will not provide particular products or services.

Ultimately, these laws and the commission were put in place because things obviously weren't working in the first place and more needed to be done. I really don't see you point.

anything I don't mind · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:15

This is outrageous idea that businesses should decide who they do business with. I think its terrible idea, recipe for disaster.

Pestilence · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:17

Thompson_NCL said:
The commission have a vested interest in finding problems in equality, so the chances are they'll tend to be on the side of the complainant.

We need to get rid of not only the commission, but all equality laws relating to who a business can serve. Let the free-market determine the future of those businesses which will not provide particular products or services.

|-----------------|
| NO BLACKS. |
| NO IRISH. |
| NO GAYS. |
|-----------------|

Sounds like a very appealing future. :/

Schlong&Stable · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:22

Pestilence said:
|-----------------|
| NO BLACKS. |
| NO IRISH. |
| NO GAYS. |
|-----------------|

Sounds like a very appealing future. :/

If people are offended by it, they'll not shop there.

I cannot imagine many businesses would use such a policy, because frankly it doesn't make good business sense: money is money.

If a business did want to have such a policy, then let them do so. I personally think it's better to see such a sign and know what you're dealing with, rather than have no sign and just be treated worse anyway.

Tombo · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:24

Pestilence said:
|-----------------|
| NO BLACKS. |
| NO IRISH. |
| NO GAYS. |
|-----------------|

Sounds like a very appealing future. :/

I expect any shop with such a sign would see a sizeable decrease in the business they received, attitudes in general have changed so I don't see many shops doing that anyway but I doubt you could stay in business very long with a policy such as that. Unless you think the majority of people are racist homophobes only kept in check by the law.

wndsr · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:24

What about the refuse collectors who may think your way of life is contrary to their personal beliefs?

Or the paramedics you call when there's an emergency?

Frightful Boar · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:25

Thompson_NCL said:
If people are offended by it, they'll not shop there.

The instances of this are going to be so rare anyway. And then I don't even think it's a big deal if someone won't make a cake cos they feel someone's lifestyle is abhorrent. It's not like they're out with pitchforks and knobkerries.

Pestilence · 11 Jul 2014 at 11:25

Thompson_NCL said:
If people are offended by it, they'll not shop there.

Yet as the place remains open (for however long it manages to stay afloat), it remains a beacon and cesspool for hatred and division to fester, safe in the knowledge and outward advertisement that we're in a country that has no problem with such practice.

All that does is further fuel, and keep alive, ignorant division. It allows disgusting people to continue justifying their disgusting views. It offers nothing positive to society. It's nonsense.