Soldato
Gays aren't a political campaign.
Bakers refuse Gay wedding cake - update: Supreme Court rules in favour of Bakers
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
Gays aren't a political campaign.
Soldato
And where have the bakers claimed to have offered to make the cake without the "political" (it's not political, not that it matters) message?
Y'know where they receive the request and realise that it's against policy to include political messages, so return to the customer with the offer of a badgeless gay cake?
Instead they said;
In an online statement, Mr McArthur said: "The directors and myself looked at it and considered it and thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs.
"It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches, and on the following Monday we rang the customer to let him know that we couldn't take his order."
Last edited:
Soldato
Not seeing the issue, their order was at odds with their beliefs because of the message they wanted on it. They didn't say they refused the order because the person ordering was at odds with their beliefs.
The statement is ambiguous on what they are actually against. If they are against the gay lifestyle rather than just gay marriage then effectively it is indirect discrimination.
Soldato
The Bible doesn't teach anything about political messages on cakes (or any other foodstuff). Their problem, quite clearly from their statement, was not with the "message"
The Bible does, it is claimed, have something to say about homosexuality.
As does the general manager;
The firm's 24-year-old general manager, Daniel McArthur, said marriage in Northern Ireland "still is defined as being a union between one man and one woman" and said his company was taking "a stand".
This is, regardless of any holy book, discriminatory. To spell it out, it is homophobic. This is both illegal and, under any reasonable measure of the term, immoral.
As for your insinuation that their refusal was of a product, rather than to a person, and therefore is not discriminatory. Well, that's about as fallacious an argument as saying modifying a building to remove ramps isn't discriminatory to wheelchair users, since they have the same access availability as non-wheelchair users: they can use the stairs like everyone else!
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
You do know what indirect discrimination is right?
You cannot refuse to employ people with children because it indirectly affects women more than men, even if you apply the rule to everyone.
If a rule you impose will affect more of a protected minority than other people then it is regarded as direct discrimination. You cannot get around that by saying well they didn't refuse to a gay person just a person with a pro-gay message on it.
Gay marriage is illegal in Northern Ireland, campaigning or supporting one position or the other is not....opposing same-sex marriage isn't discriminatory, any more than supporting it is.
And their stand was explicitly to do with the Support Gay Marriage slogan, they do not wish to be associated with a political campaign they do not support...are you suggesting that they be forced to support a political campaign?
Soldato
Pro gay-marriage is not the same as a pro-gay message, how exactly does refusing to support a campaign to change the laws on gay marriage affect gay people as a whole? By that logic you'd be forced to support any political message because by not doing so you're negatively affecting people, even though you aren't.
You seem confused, the message is about affording gay people the right to marry, something they do not currently have the right to do, this makes it a political message. The fact the bible doesn't mention political messages is irrelevant. They refuse to support the political message because it goes against their beliefs which may or may not come from the bible.
Soldato
This has been said over and over in the thread, but nowhere in the linked article is that explicitly stated at all.
What is explicitly stated is the apparent Bible position against homosexual marriage, which the bakers have decided to use as a line in the sand and to take "a stand".
So let's drop the "political message" argument, shall we?
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Of course it is. Opposing gay marriage (except for the reason that civil unions aren't offered for straight people) is saying "I think one section of society should not have the right to call their relationship the same as mine".
You can try and justify that stance, just as I would justify not letting people have sex with animals is a justifiable discrimination but you can't claim it is not discriminatory.
Then why didn't they say "We refused to make the cake on the basis we didn't want to be seen supporting a political issue" instead of (essentially) "The Bible says being gay is wrong yo"? Why did they say "we're making a stand (against gay marriage)" and not "we must, as a business, remain non-partisan".
If you've read any of the Directors' comments, you cannot seriously conclude this is a reasonable opposition to a political message. It is clearly an opposition to giving gay people a right they don't currently have.
Also...
No it isn't, it just isn't legal and the two are not the same. If a gay couple married in the UK then went on holiday to NI they wouldn't be arrested.
No we shan't. The fact is that the owners of the Baker are opposed to a change in the law, they explicitly stated that they do not support the Campaign for Same-Sex Marriage. Your own post stated as much.
Same sex marriage is currently illegal in Northern Ireland, no one should be forced to support gay marriage either explicitly nor implicitly if they do not wish to. They is contrary to the fundamental basis of freedom within democratic system.
The campaign to change the law is a political campaign, you may not like it, it may not suit your agenda, but it's the truth nonetheless.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So you admit they are supporting a political message then (i.e. no change in the law)? I thought your whole point was that they didn't?
Again 'not legal' != illegal
I've asked this question numerous time in this thread and everyone avoids it. How is baking a cake with a certain message on mean you 'support' that message? If I go into a bakery and ask for a Man Utd cake does the baker tell me I can't have it because he is a West Brom fan and by making my cake he would suddenly find himself in Old Trafford shouting "Come on you reds"?
I'd bet a pound to a penny that Ashers have made thousands of cakes with messages on they don't strictly agree with (not everyone's baby can be the cutest yet I doubt they'd deny you a cake with that message on).
I agree, but as I said they have not justified their actions on this basis, they have based it on the Bible saying gay people are wronguns.
Actually it is...it is illegal to get married as a same sex couple in Northern Ireland...it is not recognised and neither are same sex marriages from outside Northern Ireland...married same sex Couples from outside Northern Ireland are only attributed the same rights as if they had a civil partnership, which is legal in Northern Ireland.
Illegal simply means it is contrary to law, or in this context "Not Authorised by Law", and Same Sex Marriage in Northern Ireland is contrary to the current law and no same sex marriage is authorised under Northern Ireland legislature.
Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it is criminally prosecutable or that exceptions do not exist within law to address things such as other legal systems recognising or authorising same sex marriage.
They do not want to associate with or implicitly support a political campaign to change the law on same sex marriage...they have not produced literature on cakes to explicitly support a campaign to retain the law either.
Conducting or receiving a Same sex marriage in Northern Ireland is illegal. This is a matter of legislation in Northern Ireland and is not in dispute. The recognition of same sex marriages in Northern Ireland is unlawful, therefore same sex couples married under laws in other countries only receive recognition under the Civil Partnership rules in Northern Ireland. The first, is positively forbidden (you cannot conduct a same sex wedding nor be married as a same sex couple in Northern Ireland) therefore illegal...the second (a couple married in another jurisdiction) is unlawful and therefore is not recognised or given the same rights as they would receive in that jurisdiction, they are given and recognised as being synonymous with a Civil Partnership, which is both legal and lawful.
Read the thread, it was explained several times how a company can be implicitly associated with the goods and services it supplies and the campaigns, political and otherwise that it contracts to.
They have based it on their belief that gay marriage should remain defined between a man and woman, which, in Northern Ireland is the current legal definition...are you saying they have to support, either explicitly or implicitly a change in the law or a group that is campaigning for a change in the law?
Last edited:
you could argue that supplying halal discriminates against Sikhs who are forbidden from eating such meat... but then again a Sikh customer could easily go for a non-meat option... The point is the business chooses what to produce/sell.
its not a 'gay cake' I shouldn't need to explain this but it is a pretty fundamental point here - a cake can't be gay, they're not discriminating by refusing to create a particular cake.... you're not obliged to support gay marriage - some gay people don't sport gay marriage - it isn't a fundamental part of being gay... being attracted to someone from the opposite sex is what makes someone gay. Supporting or not supporting the legal options gay couples have for registering their relationship should they chose to is an opinion, view, political stance... you're not forced or obliged to assist in supporting a political campaign and you ought to be allowed to disassociate yourself from one.
Could you support that with a quote or some such? Because so far all I have seen is the bakers proclaiming that baking the cake was against their beliefs and mention of homosexuality rather than the specific mention of opposition to gay marriage.
There was a quote above;
The firm's 24-year-old general manager, Daniel McArthur, said marriage in Northern Ireland "still is defined as being a union between one man and one woman" and said his company was taking "a stand".
That explicitly states they are opposed to same sex marriage on the grounds that the definition of marriage is currently defined in Northern Ireland as being between a man and woman. Can you supply a quote supporting that they said homosexuals are wrong'uns as it was expressed above? All the reports I have seen or read all state it was the campaign and the slogan they objected to, not the fact that the people asking for the cake were gay, can you show that the cake was refused simply and solely because they were homosexuals rather than it being the campaign against same sex marriage?
Last edited:
It doesn't matter what the bible does or doesn't say or whether they've correctly interpreted it or not... its completely irrelevant. The only important point is that they don't believe in gay marriage (regardless of where that belief comes from), in fact they oppose gay marriage... that's all that matters. They oppose something, they don't want to create a product that endorses that thing they oppose.
Yes they might well be raging homophobes... I don't care if they are or not - if they refused to serve a gay customer in general purely because they were gay then I'd say the gay customer does have a case and they should be sued for discrimination... The wheelchair analogy is silly - where there is an obligation to provide disabled access then they're clearly in the wrong.There isn't an obligation however to have to support everything a protected group believes in...
Sorry I missed it. And no I cant because I didn't actually say that, just all of the quotes I have seen made no mention of Same Sex marriage.
Sorry I missed it. And no I cant because I didn't actually say that, just all of the quotes I have seen made no mention of Same Sex marriage.
I didn't say you said it, but you seem to be implying that you only read that they refused on the basis of the persons homosexuality. There's no need to rolleyes at me.