Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask you what you think about the Christian bakery?

402 replies

Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 18:49

Can't see a thread about this on here - apologies if there is one already.

For those who haven't read the story, a bakery in Northern Ireland has refused to bake a cake for a gay person. They wanted Bert and Ernie on the top of the cake with the words "Queerspace".

BBC Link here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28206581

I am completely torn here. On one hand, I am a big believer in "trendy" rights not trumping "untrendy" ones. The rights of Christians are just as important as the rights of gay people.

I am also a big believer in the freedom of private business to contract with whoever they wished.

But then, if this bakery had refused to serve a black person on the grounds of race, I would feel deeply uncomfortable about it.

So Mumsnet, tell me what you think!

OP posts:
landrover · 08/07/2014 23:29

Im not defending it at all, but there do seem to be some groups that are actively going out of their way to make their point continually. And yet again, this is at cost to us all, as taxpayers, we are paying! When will it end? It could keep going forever, continually finding people who may not personally be happy (for instance if they have a religious belief).

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:29

When you work for the State, or with the general public, you are compelled not to discriminate. Exactly. The European Convention on Human Rights compels the State not to discriminate. But it only works between the state and its citizens.

Any piece of legislation which seeks to impose such requirements as between citizens is in its very nature draconian. I'm sure you can read the Equality Act yourself, Seven. The part we are discussing is section 29.

I am perfectly ok with people having to treat others reasonably

Me too. I think the bakery treated the customer reasonably. They weren't rude, they gave them a full refund. The fact they chose not to make them this cake doesn't make them "unreasonable". This isn't about reasonableness, this is about compulsion to enter a contract when they didn't want to.

OP posts:
MaidOfStars · 08/07/2014 23:30

SevenZarkSeven, may I politely suggest that if you are so willing to misrepresent the opposite argument to yours, you do so with another poster.

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:30

his thread is appalling. I know people feel like this but to actually " meet " them is disconcerting.

As an aside, I find the fact that you cannot even acknowledge that there may be another point of view extremely disconcerting. Try and see that there might be two sides to a question.

OP posts:
SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:31

Maid I read your post. You want equalities legislation removed for non public sector workers. That is what you out but it makes no sense in light of your next post

SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:32

Summerbreezer you haven't said which parts of the equalities act you think are draconian.

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:32

Maid never said that. You are entitled to your view, but sweeping statements that misrepresent other posters does you no credit at all. This is not about employment legislation, it is the provision of goods and services.

OP posts:
SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:33

And yes I know for example that people are racist and sexist and anti Semitic but I never get used to "meeting" them

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:34

Are you suggesting the people on this thread who disagree with you are homophobic?

OP posts:
BoulevardOfBrokenSleep · 08/07/2014 23:37

I understand your point about contracts - something about an offer to treat, is it?

But a business is not a person. No-one knocked on Old Mrs Miggins' door and said "Oh, I see you're making cupcakes, can you do some with rainbow icing for our Gay Pride parade please?" I can see that would be 'draconian'.

SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:38

I think some of them are, yes.
Some are having fun adopting a stance around something that will never effect then personally.
Some are following religious ideas.

A range of reasons.

Before I go and check the act, is it the whole of that section you want repealed?

treaclesoda · 08/07/2014 23:38

the problem for the baker in this particular scenario is that his beliefs are such that what he is weighing up is essentially a bit of bad publicity and lost business versus eternity in hell. Whether anyone else agrees with his beliefs is really neither here nor there in that respect. When you look at it like that, it's not hard to see why he chose the way he did.

DioneTheDiabolist · 08/07/2014 23:39

Seven, that is not my reading of Maid's posts at all. As far as I can see she supports the Equality Act, but she does not support people being compelled to produce items promoting a political stance which they oppose.

treaclesoda · 08/07/2014 23:40

and the firm have been in business for a long time, so the 'well you shouldn't go into business if you don't want to serve everyone' argument is flawed because the business predates the law in this case.

MaidOfStars · 08/07/2014 23:41

You want equalities legislation removed for non public sector workers

No I don't. Not in the slightest. So I guess:

  1. You didn't read my posts.
  2. You don't understand my points.
  3. You're too concerned with shrieking and pointing fingers to engage.

I'm hoping we are just misunderstanding each other, so let me clarify that I do not support discrimination in any public job, whether for State or for a private company. I do support the right for a person to not be compelled to support a political/social activity that they disagree with when conducting business in private contract.

This is solely based on my immediate disgust that the State might one day compel me to bake a pro-choice cake (should pro-choice ever become the State's position).

That is what you out but it makes no sense in light of your next post

Perhaps that might have indicated to you that you have misunderstood.

I mean, I can only assume you have misunderstood because you then accuse me of wanting to sack pregnant women and allow 'white only' businesses, which is just fucking bizarre.

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:41

But what is the difference, Boulevard? What if Mrs Miggins put a sign in her door saying "cupcakes for sale"? Does she then become a business? What if she isn't selling them?

I understand this bakery to be a fair sized business, but the B&B couple were just that - a couple running a business. It is still a private thing.

I am uncomfortable with the State dictating to private citizens in this way in the name of tolerance. I actually find it very intolerant.

i said in my OP that I would have difficulty with someone refusing to serve someone on grounds of their sexual orientation/race or whatever.

But this is going further than that.

OP posts:
BookABooSue · 08/07/2014 23:42

SevenZarkSeven please point out the posts where anyone is suggesting that it is ok to discriminate against people or that they want to return to the catalogue of discriminations that you list.

The argument is entirely represented in the adage of: I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it

Or in this case, to paraphrase, I'd have no problem baking a cake for Queerspace except I'm a rubbish baker but I absolutely defend the baker's right not to be forced to make any bespoke item for a political campaign.
HTH

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:44

*I think some of them are, yes.
Some are having fun adopting a stance around something that will never effect then personally.
Some are following religious ideas.

A range of reasons.*

If you see a homophobic post, report it. I have not seen a single one. Here's a thought - maybe there is a valid point in opposition to what you are saying? Not one you have to agree with, not at all. But a valid point, all the same.

OP posts:
SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:44

She made a statement that individuals must be allowed to discriminate in their own private business. I took that to mean full stop. Re- reading, it could be taken differently I guess.

In my defence, this thread has totally freaked me out. I had no idea these types of views were so prevalent.

SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:46

Summerbreezer I still don't get which bits of the equalities act you want repealed. Is it the whole of that section?

PPaka · 08/07/2014 23:47

I think anyone making a stand against gay marriage, because the bible says it's wrong, is discriminating and sooo wrong

Plain and simple

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:47

I would repeal section 29, yes.

OP posts:
SevenZarkSeven · 08/07/2014 23:49

Well that clears that up. Your stance is clear. I disagree with it.

Original poster
Summerbreezer · 08/07/2014 23:49

Have you actually taken the trouble to read section 29 yet?

OP posts:
doobledootch · 08/07/2014 23:50

craicdealer that example is very apt I think. Abortion is illegal here and I am under the impression that pro-life is more dominant as a view than pro-choice. So both the law and what is viewed as the social norm could be used to comply you to make those anti-abortion banners and public outrage could be stirred up if you refused because it goes against your personal views.