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

spudbynight · 20 May 2015 at 10:50

TheLegendOfMart said:
Yeah because not stocking a record is the same as telling people they are a second class citizen not deserving of the same rights and privileges as 'normal' people.

It wasn't my argument.

spoffle · 20 May 2015 at 10:50

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

Was, or were?

The Geezer · 20 May 2015 at 10:50

TheLegendOfMart said:
My point is that you don't get all of the above happen to you just because you are straight, that's why gays need 'special' laws.

Mate you'll never get through to certain folk on here. They have no understanding of the Equality Act and why it exists.

Society is still full of bigotry and thanks to the Equality Act these bigots are struggling to find places to hide. Make examples of all these people is the only way society will start to learn that certain behaviors are unacceptable

deuse · 20 May 2015 at 10:51

TheLegendOfMart said:
I'm hard of hearing as well, I never get that. Maybe you need to surround yourselves with decent people..

You must live in a city of very nice people, who never say a bad word about anyone. Where is this utopia?

Or don't you go out and about?

markweatherill · 20 May 2015 at 10:52

I am not sure if anyone has made a 'having their cake and eating it' comment yet.

Does anyone know that the offended 'gay rights activist' took his business elsewhere and got his cake from another source?

Schlong&Stable · 20 May 2015 at 10:52

TheLegendOfMart said:
My point is that you don't get all of the above happen to you just because you are straight, that's why gays need 'special' laws.

Rubbish. Bad things can happen to you if you're tall or short, fat or thin, black or white, rich or poor etc. Whatever sets you apart is always going to be cause for people to treat you poorly. Creating special laws for homosexuals not only suggests that they are the perpetual victim, but also sets a precedent for others to get special laws too. Its utterly stupid and dis-empowering.

Mate you'll never get through to certain folk on here. They have no understanding of the Equality Act and why it exists.

Society is still full of bigotry and thanks to the Equality Act these bigots are struggling to find places to hide. Make examples of all these people is the only way society will start to learn that certain behaviors are unacceptable

It exists to make money for the judiciary.

cheesyboy · 20 May 2015 at 10:54

spudbynight said:
It wasn't a good argument the first time around.

Do you really think a record shop should be compelled to stock certain products? What sort of fascism is this.

Standing urinals only. Does nobody poo-poo in this school?

A library is state owned and as such has duties to provide services like disabled access. I don't believe a private company should be compelled to provide disabled access.

The point, which seemingly requires shorter words to explain, is that a service can be discriminatory in nature even if it is offered equally to all.

i.e. that no-one, gay or straight, can buy a gay cake doesn't mean that refusing to offer homosexual cake options is not discriminatory.

Sliver · 20 May 2015 at 10:55

The Geezer said:
Mate you'll never get through to certain folk on here. They have no understanding of the Equality Act and why it exists.

Society is still full of bigotry and thanks to the Equality Act these bigots are struggling to find places to hide. Make examples of all these people is the only way society will start to learn that certain behaviors are unacceptable

Indeed. As an egalitarian I believe that everyone should be treated equally under the law. It's not happening all the time everywhere though right now. Fortunately, things can work out ok in the end.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25119158

Belly · 20 May 2015 at 10:57

If the bakers were Catholics could they NOT have used the following as an excuse NOT to take the order.

Leviticus 20:13 (KJV) If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death ; their blood shall be upon them.

I'm a born again Atheist, heterosexual and have nothing against gay (homosexual) marriage.

Sliver · 20 May 2015 at 10:59

Belly said:
I'm a born again Atheist, heterosexual and have nothing against gay (homosexual) marriage.

Welcome to a world of reason and critical thinking. Enjoy your stay!

deuse · 20 May 2015 at 11:00

cheesyboy said:
The point, which seemingly requires shorter words to explain, is that a service can be discriminatory in nature even if it is offered equally to all.

i.e. that no-one, gay or straight, can buy a gay cake doesn't mean that refusing to offer homosexual cake options is not discriminatory.

So you would agree that a food place not serving none halal meat to a Christian is being discriminatory?

spoffle · 20 May 2015 at 11:01

TheLegendOfMart said:
I'm 6 foot 4 and not stereotypically gay, if you met me you wouldn't be able to tell that I was. Keep your moronic comments to yourself.

Is not being 6 foot 4 a gay stereotype or something? What's your height got to do with it?

George Hincapie · 20 May 2015 at 11:01

spoffle said:
Was, or were?

That comma isn't needed. If you are going to be a Grammar Nazi then you really ought to make sure you don't get it wrong yourself

spoffle · 20 May 2015 at 11:02

deuse said:
I'm a grown up and my mother taught me not to be a moron.

No, I don't think she did.

spudbynight · 20 May 2015 at 11:02

Belly said:
If the bakers were Catholics could they NOT have used the following as an excuse NOT to take the order.

Leviticus 20:13 (KJV) If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death ; their blood shall be upon them.

I'm a born again Atheist, heterosexual and have nothing against gay (homosexual) marriage.

Well for a start they wouldn't cite a protestant bible. Apart from that they would have a better understanding of Jesus's fulfilment of the old law.

The Geezer · 20 May 2015 at 11:02

deuse said:
So you would agree that a food place not serving none halal meat to a Christian is being discriminatory?

Not against the law, try another

cheesyboy · 20 May 2015 at 11:03

deuse said:
So you would agree that a food place not serving none halal meat to a Christian is being discriminatory?

I'm not aware of any necessity to avoid Halal meat under Christianity, and I am also aware that vegetarian options would always avoid any issues with Halal food anyway. So, no, I wouldn't agree.

deuse · 20 May 2015 at 11:04

cheesyboy said:
I'm not aware of any necessity to avoid Halal meat under Christianity, and I am also aware that vegetarian options would always avoid any issues with Halal food anyway. So, no, I wouldn't agree.

Thanks for the answer.

cheesyboy · 20 May 2015 at 11:04

spoffle said:
Is not being 6 foot 4 a gay stereotype or something? What's your height got to do with it?

He said 6'4" AND not stereotypically gay. Two different descriptors.

And he was talking about fighting, so height might be relevant.

Sliver · 20 May 2015 at 11:07

spudbynight said:
they would have a better understanding of Jesus's fulfilment of the old law.

There is no mention of Jesus recanting the arcane laws on homosexuality in the New Testament. Same with slavery. In fact Jesus is referenced as saying 'Slaves obey your masters, even the cruel ones' (Ephesians 6:5)(1 Peter 2:18 ).

So you can say the New Testament brought with it a new covenant till the cows come home, but actually it didn't. People today just cherry pick the bible and this cherry picking spans the old testament as well as the new.