Ashers Bakery Lose Same-Sex Cake Appeal

[Islay]

Common sense at last, they run a business if you bake a cake in Liverpool colours does not mean that you support Liverpool!

They were in the wrong and its about time the accepted it.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/live-updates-ashers-bakery-lose-samesex-cake-appeal-35154967.html

[andy-hughes]

jno //I don't want to diminish the rights of gays, but even straights are told occasionally "Sorry, we can't take your order, but have you tried X on the next street?" //

Now you are back-pedalling on your earlier post when you opined that the judgement was harsh on the bakers.

It's not as harsh as blatant and illegal discrimination on the grounds of orientation.

If they were as Christian as they claim, they should have tempered their high-handed bigotry with a little of the compassion that their Christ taught them, and looked for a solution that would not upset and / or offend a fellow human being - and that would have avoided their court case, and their unwillingness to accept that what they did was wrong, legally and morally wrong.

[Islay]

//I don't want to diminish the rights of gays, but even straights are told occasionally "Sorry, we can't take your order, but have you tried X on the next street?" //

But they were not told that!!

[douglas9401]

One in the eye for those who've maintained that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

[andy-hughes]

Islay - ////I don't want to diminish the rights of gays, but even straights are told occasionally "Sorry, we can't take your order, but have you tried X on the next street?" //

But they were not told that!! //

Exactly!

'I can't take your order, and I'd prefer not to say why ....' is a legally permitted response.

'I can't take your order because I don't agree with the message on your cake which supports homosexuality ... ' is not.

[trt]

Disgusting decision, where has our Democracy gone.

If Its their business, nobody else should be allowed interfere!!!!.

[jno]

Islay, I'm trying to think of things that people could do to stop minor cake issues ending up in bitter court battles. Gays shouldn't be discriminated against. But equally bakers shouldn't be forced to bake anything that any customer demands. (Why shouldn't an Arsenal fan refuse to bake a cake in Liverpool colours?)

[douglas9401]

I wonder, if the bakery had used the non-specific 'I'd prefer not to say why', just how long the inevitable to and fro at the counter would have gone on before the forces of law and order were called to sort it all out and who would have been the baddie in that scenario.

It's tough at the flour face.

[Islay]

So where does it stop jno 'I'm not serving you because your a redhead' or ' I think you have had enough pies love'

They broke the law!

[Islay]

//Disgusting decision, where has our Democracy gone.

If Its their business, nobody else should be allowed interfere!!!!. //

Trt, of course its their business but there are laws that need to be abided by and in this case they did not follow the law of ' you cannot discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation'.

[jno]

where does it stop.... absolutely, Islay, that is the question. It always arises when one person's rights collide with another's. And in the end it's judges who have to decide.

I disagree with andy hughes that they took the case because they thought they were above the law; nobody does that. They thought the law was being wrongly applied. The court presumably accepted this possibility, otherwise they wouldn't have heard the appeal in the first place; but they decided the interpretation was correct.

So where exactly does this leave tradespeople who want to be free to refuse work from some customers? As I suggested, I think they will now have to lie about why they don't want to take the job.

[andy-hughes]

jno - //So where exactly does this leave tradespeople who want to be free to refuse work from some customers? As I suggested, I think they will now have to lie about why they don't want to take the job. //

It leaves them where tradespeople have always been - with the right to refuse service without giving a reason why.

That is their entitlement under the law.

Obviously, in the interests of not developing a bad reputation, it is probably wiser to offer a valid reason - and simple lack of time would obviously suffice.

As I have said several times, their Christian duty not to hurt and offend people should trump their need to stamp their bigotry all over their business attitudes - and if they had been a little more 'Christian', they could have avoided this entire sorry business.

If they read their bibles, they will see that Christ lived an amply more broad-minded life in terms of accommodating people who didn't share his teaching - maybe they should look to that as a better example than following human arrogance about the rights of others to live their own lives.

[youngmafbog]

I wonder what the result would have been had they been an Islamic bakery?

[ToraToraTora]

they'd have baked it and lobbed it off the building YMB!

[andy-hughes]

YMB - //I wonder what the result would have been had they been an Islamic bakery? //

Exactly the same - the law is the law.

[poorclare]

Yes all very well but it is their business. Just bought some items = lovely

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //As I have said several times, their Christian duty not to hurt and offend people should trump their need to stamp their bigotry all over their business attitudes//

There’s that ‘bigotry word again, but this is not bigotry, it is a matter of faith. Their holy book tells them that homosexuality is an abomination, and therefore that’s what they believe, and they want no part of it. It’s utterly absurd to suggest that if they didn’t want to make this cake they shouldn’t be in the business of making cakes. Their business, their choice. I don’t see how this was ‘enforcing’ their beliefs either. If it’s against the law to stand by your principles then I feel the law is in error.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //andy-hughes, //As I have said several times, their Christian duty not to hurt and offend people should trump their need to stamp their bigotry all over their business attitudes//

There’s that ‘bigotry word again, but this is not bigotry, it is a matter of faith. Their holy book tells them that homosexuality is an abomination, and therefore that’s what they believe, and they want no part of it. It’s utterly absurd to suggest that if they didn’t want to make this cake they shouldn’t be in the business of making cakes. Their business, their choice. I don’t see how this was ‘enforcing’ their beliefs either. If it’s against the law to stand by your principles then I feel the law is in error. //

Cloaking bigotry in faith is a matter of semantics.

Islamists do it all the time - it is a concept that is not acceptable - taking a certain aspect of a holy book and giving it a personal human twist in order to see it as supporting your own personal prejudices is still bigotry - I fail to see how it can be seen as anything else.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //taking a certain aspect of a holy book and giving it a personal human twist //

But they haven't done that. Their book is quite clear on the subject. No ifs or buts.

[ToraToraTora]

What we have here is the old metric martys game again. Some outfit with a bee in their bonnet deliberately go to an outlet that they know will object to what they want. Then they can act all horrified an in cases like this one, line pockets of the leeches whilst forcing the retailer to comply. Most of us would just go an find another cake shop. Both sides at fault really the only winners here are the lawyers as usual.

[jno]

andy, I don't see that Christians are somehow under greater moral compulsion to be tolerant than, say, gays (or me, or anyone else). The upshot here seems to be that it's okay to be Christian as long as you don't make it obvious. That sounds uncomfortably close to the way being gay used to be: you're okay as long as you stay in the closet.