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

V F · 19 May 2015 at 22:12

lurkio said:
I never realised a cake could have a sexual preference !

I guess it depends which way faces up. Besides, why Bert & Ernie… They aren't gay.

Heh…

Nitefly · 19 May 2015 at 22:13

Gake?

Pudney · 19 May 2015 at 22:49

thep02 said:
No you see in an effort to make the troubles look like they weren't simply based in religious bigotry the two sides were renamed loyalists and republicans to the rest of the world

You are so far wide of the mark with this remark you completely trivialise the actual complex issues causing the troubles in NI.

atpbx · 20 May 2015 at 07:10

This law needs a massive reform.

Things like this should not be taking up court time, the most shocking thing about this whole thing, regardless of which side of the argument you are on, is that the man in question thought it was acceptable to take this course of action.

Destination · 20 May 2015 at 07:17

atpbx said:
This law needs a massive reform.

Things like this should not be taking up court time, the most shocking thing about this whole thing, regardless of which side of the argument you are on, is that the man in question thought it was acceptable to take this course of action.

As opposed t the cake shop refusing to make him a cake on grounds of discrimination?
You can play your line both ways.
Where does it stop?

SexyGreyFox · 20 May 2015 at 07:22

estebanrey said:
Funny how Ashers use uniforms made of more than one type of cloth, how they sell shellfish/pork products and are open on Sundays.

Yet somehow those bits from their Holy book get overlooked for profit but homosexuality...oh no!!!!

If these so-called 'born again Christians' were that dedicated to their Holy book then they would apply all of it and not just the bits that fit their personal modern compasses.

Christians who blame their issue with Gay Marriage on some kind of devout commitment to scripture remind me of people in the 60s who said they didn't want black people moving into the neighbourhood not because they were racist, but because they were so loving they feared these new immigrants would be bullied.

Stop hiding and just admit you're bigoted and then we can move on.

Up to this point I've been sitting on the fence and dropping on one side and then jumping back over but this post has convinced me which side I'm on now.
Thanks.

daz.rathbone · 20 May 2015 at 07:27

Am I missing something in this story?

I thought they refused based on what was requested to be on the cake - didn't discriminate because the potential customer was gay, but effectively because they wanted a gay propoganda cake.

That's what I'd have argued. No different to a white supremacist asking for a nazi cake or similar - and I'm sure there would be no uproar if that was refused, or someone asking for a cake with a bunch of profanities on it.

Destination · 20 May 2015 at 07:29

Both of which would be offensive and in some cases against the law, being gay isn't. Unless you are ashers and obey some parts of 'gods law'.
It is completely different form of refusal.
Gays are not nazis, nor are they flunet in copious spouting of obscenities on their cakes.
How do you really think it is the same thing?

daz.rathbone · 20 May 2015 at 07:43

Because if they refused the order because the customer was gay, that is discrimination. If they refused the order because the content of the order offended them, how is that discrimination?

If a straight person had ordered this cake and they still refused, who is being discriminated against then?

And forget the nazi example then - what about someone requesting a cake with swearing on "Happy birthday you ****" and they refused.
That is not against the law, and I don't see how refusing that would be discriminatory.

daz.rathbone · 20 May 2015 at 07:46

Also you say "Both of which would be offensive". Offensive is subjective - they found this request offensive, whether you like their reasons or not.

TheLegendOfMart · 20 May 2015 at 08:02

daz.rathbone said:
Because if they refused the order because the customer was gay, that is discrimination. If they refused the order because the content of the order offended them, how is that discrimination?

If a straight person had ordered this cake and they still refused, who is being discriminated against then?

And forget the nazi example then - what about someone requesting a cake with swearing on "Happy birthday you ****" and they refused.
That is not against the law, and I don't see how refusing that would be discriminatory.

The point is they refused to print a pro-gay message on a cake ordered by a gay person because their made up book says homosexuality is a sin which is illegal.

Printing Nazi symbology on a cake could be considered racist thus against the law and the bakery would have been well within their rights to say no.

The court found that the bakery denied service based on the sexual orientation of the customer as well as the "political message", someone buying "you're a ****" doesn't break any anti discrimination laws we have.

Why is it so hard to understand and why do people keep making ridiculous comparisons and analogies that are off the charts wrong, I guess people are just ignorant being born of the "right" race and sexuality.

Imagine how you feel thinking this ruling is ridiculous and unjust, now try and put yourself in the mind of someone who has just been refused service purely because of which team they bat for, the kind of people who get verbally abused, beat up and murdered for liking the same gender.

atpbx · 20 May 2015 at 08:11

Hikari Kisugi said:
As opposed t the cake shop refusing to make him a cake on grounds of discrimination?
You can play your line both ways.
Where does it stop?

It's all a question of perspective.

Someone basically said, I'm not going to back a cake with that on it, as I don't want to.

This person then decided he would go to court.

Now, if it was something actually important, being refused medical treatment, housing, a job etc. Then yes, going to court would be entirely understandable.

This should have been thrown out and the applicant told to get a grip.

TheLegendOfMart · 20 May 2015 at 08:14

atpbx said:
It's all a question of perspective.

Someone basically said, I'm not going to back a cake with that on it, as I don't want to.

This person then decided he would go to court.

Now, if it was something actually important, being refused medical treatment, housing, a job etc. Then yes, going to court would be entirely understandable.

This should have been thrown out and the applicant told to get a grip.

The law is the law, you can't pick and choose how to apply the same law based on what you personally believe is trivial.

deuse · 20 May 2015 at 08:24

Human rights will be gone soon, so all back to normal

Twirlywoos · 20 May 2015 at 08:24

thep02 · 20 May 2015 at 08:31

Pudney said:
You are so far wide of the mark with this remark you completely trivialise the actual complex issues causing the troubles in NI.

No I didn't.

George Hincapie · 20 May 2015 at 08:39

All the store had to say was that they were fully booked. The couple would have gone elsewhere and none of this drama would have happened.

deuse · 20 May 2015 at 08:46

George Hincapie said:
All the store had to say was that they were fully booked. The couple would have gone elsewhere and none of this drama would have happened.

Unless the bandits was looking for trouble\attention?

Spacedeck · 20 May 2015 at 08:48

atpbx said:
*snip*

But if that was done every time, then nothing would ever change and we would have discrimination all over the place with people just being told "get over it". Throwing out the problem doesn't solve it.

TheLegendOfMart · 20 May 2015 at 09:10

deuse said:
Unless the bandits was looking for trouble\attention?

Yeah they went to a cake shop to make a cake just so they could kick up a fuss and get meager compensation which they then donated to charity.

You may not like it but these kind of cases get so much attention is because of discrimination and inequality. If they are just told to put up and shut up then nothing will ever happen and gays will always be second class citizens.

I guess you don't have empathy or compassion being a straight, white, male eh. Let's hope nothing ever happens to you and people just tell you to shut up and deal with it...