To think that the Christian bakery case has potentially created a dangerous precedent.

[SummerGems]

So, Christian cake bakers in NI have won their appeal against their refusing to bake a cake with a gay marriage slogan on it.

The judges have voted unanimously that this was not a case of discrimination or politics but that it was about freedom of speech and that they would have refused to make the cake even if it had been a straight person wanting the cake with a gay slogan on it...

But the sexuality argument aside, this has surely raised some questions in terms of the equality act and how far one should be allowed to go against that in the name of free speech?

After all,if your beliefs decree that people with disabilities are so because of the sins of their ancestors, or that single parents are committing wrong,should they be allowed to say so and refuse to serve them on the basis of their beliefs? Where does this end?

Although the news reports of 'gay cake' makes me smile.

I'd say they've probably got as much advantage from the publicity than he has. I don't think he should've taken legal action, but there are a lot of people in NI who agree with their views but who wouldn't previously have been aware of them.

So this whole sorry debacle has cost Mr Gareth Lee the pricely sum of £0 . What a dick he is ! I hope Ashers sue him for wasting their time and money .

Princely not pricely

ANY OTHER RELIGION would have their beliefs upheld, so why should beliefs and values of Christianity not be upheld too?

@GunpowderGelatine

Because it seems that Christianity is fair game. I see all the time on MN especially. My DD attends as Catholic School and I mentioned in one thread that I believe the Christian teachings have made her a kinder and more thoughtful human being.

Cue a barrage of "pffft oh yeah such great teachings with priests abusing boys". I'm obviously not condoning that but it stayed up despite my reporting and I was angry because if someone came on and said their Muslim School taught their child to be a good person, anyone saying "pffft yeah teaching them to blow up buildings" would most certainly be banned.

This ^ in spades! I get so pissed off with how it seems OK to berate Christianity, but not any other religion. Even the Atheist comedian Ricky Gervais slags off Christians, (I mean proper lays into them,) and when asked why he doesn't slag off Muslims or Sikhs and so on, all he says is 'I was raised as a Christian, so I have that right!'

Still doesn't answer why he doesn't bash other religions. It's a cop out, and he is a coward. As is anyone who slags off Christianity, but refuses to bash any other religion. So typical in this country; bash the main religion in the country, and Christians have to suck it up, but God FORBID you slag off Muslims or Sikhs etc... Not allowed. Oh NO!

It seems it's the fashionable PC/liberal view. It's cultural and insidious.

To be fair to Gervais he has bashed other religions in his stand up routines, he makes a point of saying its every religion and his talk with Steven Colbert and others he doesn't just focus on Christianity.

But this thread is beginning to take a bit of a dark turn now where its not needed.

YY, believe, don't believe, no skin off my nose but when MN allows posts to stay up mocking people for 'believing in a sky fairy' then it's a clear prejudice against Christianity as they wouldn't dare criticise belief in another religion. In fact it's usually the self-proclaimed woke people who'd be the first to jump on Islamophobia that do this.

Anyway, I digress, apologies!

So this whole sorry debacle has cost Mr Gareth Lee the pricely sum of £0 . What a dick he is ! I hope Ashers sue him for wasting their time and money.

Why, do you think they've not used up enough of either already? They'd get absolutely rinsed if they tried it, since he had enough of a case to persuade more than one court.

Let's suppose I bake cakes and someone wanted me to make a cake celebrating Adolf Hitler's birthday.
Little twiglet people. perhaps, and voile representing the smoke from the crematorium.
Would you bake this cake?

@justanotherlurker

To be fair to Gervais he has bashed other religions in his stand up routines, he makes a point of saying its every religion and his talk with Steven Colbert and others he doesn't just focus on Christianity.

But this thread is beginning to take a bit of a dark turn now where its not needed.

I disagree. I have never heard or seen Ricky Gervais slag off any SPECIFIC religion, only Christianity. He slags it off on Twitter usually.

If you can find any tweets (or articles or film footage,) where he is slagging off Islam/Muslims, (or ANY other religion,) then please provide a link to them, because I have definitely never seen them.

I have only ever seen him berate Christianity. Moreover, he has said himself that he only bashes Christianity because he feels he has the right to. (Which as I said, is a cop out, and is cowardly...)

And the thread has not taken any 'dark turn' people are just having a discussion.

@GunpowderGelatine

YY, believe, don't believe, no skin off my nose but when MN allows posts to stay up mocking people for 'believing in a sky fairy' then it's a clear prejudice against Christianity as they wouldn't dare criticise belief in another religion. In fact it's usually the self-proclaimed woke people who'd be the first to jump on Islamophobia that do this.

Exactly this!

As for the amount of money that has been used in court costs for this. The people in question who tried to sue the bakery, should be MADE to pay it all - in FULL. Why the F should they get away with paying nothing?

This is an interesting point. What if someone who the bakery perceived to be straight had asked for the same message? Would they have refused them?
He was not refused. A person in the bakery took the order, the cake makers refused to ice the message. A good friend of mine volunteers at Queer Space, she is heterosexual. Had she ordered the cake Ashers would still have refused to write that message.

This was the right decision.

The couple did not refuse the man's custom, they refused to produce a particular design of cake.

If a conservative Christian bakers could be forced to produce a cake with a pro-gay marriage slogan, then the implication is that gay bakers could be forced to produce a cake with, e.g. 'homosexuality is a sin', and a baker who had undergone an abortion could be forced to produce a cake with 'abortion is murder', to give a couple of examples.

(I support marriage equality, for the record).

People in business are not paid to provide a public service.
It’s private enterprise and they are not obliged to make anything they don’t wish to.
If the court had found in favour of the complainants, it would have set a dangerous precedent IMHO.

OP of you think of the cake as a piece of commissioned art, would it change your opinion? No one should be forced to produce something with a message they disagree with just because a customer is paying for it. If the bakers were considered artists and somebody approached them wanting to commission a piece of art praising gay marriage, they could politely decline. Which is what they did - they did not refuse to serve a gay person, they were happy to serve them. They were not happy to produce something with a message they do not believe in.

I fully support gay marriage (although I think it actually distracts from a lot of the much bigger issues facing the LGB community in an attempt to placate them), but nobody can be forced to support it. As long as they are not being hateful about it, they are allowed to not believe in it for religious reasons. They weren't hateful because they did not refuse to serve the customer, they refuses to produce a product.

I disagree. I have never heard or seen Ricky Gervais slag off any SPECIFIC religion, only Christianity. He slags it off on Twitter usually.

You are trying to turn this into a direction that is not warranted, and I suspect you haven't really watched his stand up or listened to him.

He specifically states as a precursor to all his jokes or interviews that he is including all organised religion, but as with most comedy it comes from personal experience rather than just attacking. His personal experience is Christianity, it isn't a singling out and I agree with his stance on organised religion

If the court had found in favour of the complainants, it would have set a dangerous precedent IMHO.

This is the point I made early and I wholeheartedly agree.

The customer's sexual orientation had nothing to do with the issue.

This is an interesting point. What if someone who the bakery perceived to be straight had asked for the same message? Would they have refused them?
And also, is it fair to say that it's more likely that someone wanting a 'support gay marriage' message would be gay than straight? In that sense, it IS to do with sexual orientation.

This is literally the whole point of the case. He argued that they had discriminated against him because of his sexuality. They argued that they had not because they would have refused that order from a person of any sexuality. The Supreme Court agreed that the message was one which is supported by people of any sexuality and therefore they were not discriminating on the basis of his sexuality.

I'm a pagan and there is no way I'd expect a christian bakery to make a cake with a pagan slogan on it. I'd go elsewhere.
I totally believe people should be allowed to say no if it contradicts their beliefs and values.
We should all be allowed to conduct our lives as we wish and say no to things that we disagree with.
Where will all this end?

My response was very tongue in cheek Paul, I have no desire to hear anything about this whole shambles ever again .
Hopefully it will prevent similar happening in future . What a waste of time and money !

Gareth Lee admitted that he chose Ashers, knowing they were a Christian bakery, and wanted to test them. The whole thing was a cynical ploy - and he deliberately planned to take it to the Equality Commission. As a tax-funded body, the Equality Commission should be ashamed of having wasted thousands of taxpayers' money on this.

Have been fascinated to read the responses to the ruling on this thread.

I think if we believe that our beliefs and choices are the same as our identity, it leads to a feeling that the bakery's decision was discrimination - refusing to endorse a positive statement about gay marriage is equivalent to abusing the individual who would like the option to choose gay marriage.

However if we believe it is possible for someone to disagree with our beliefs and choices and not therefore automatically threaten our very identity, Ashers were entitled to choose not to write that message even as they were happy to continue to serve the customer other products.

As I understand it, the SCOTUK chose the latter today.

I think this is at the heart of so many contentious issues and our increasing inability to debate and disagree without degenerating into ad hominem attacks. Dare I say, TWAW follows the same path - are my beliefs and choices equivalent to my identity?

There is no legal way to refuse business based on what someone is wearing. This isn’t France, you can’t force muslim women to uncover themselves. Why would you want to? Seriously, this comparison is stupid

That comment is nonsense. Many hotels, clubs and restaurants have and enforce dress codes. Try getting past the doormen at The Ritz in the wrong clothes or in the dining room of certain Mayfair clubs without a tie.

The ban in the silly example given would be to full face coverings which is what Denmark et al ban.

Finding out there are gay people who are incapable of baking their own cake has destroyed my cherished stereotypes ...

And also, is it fair to say that it's more likely that someone wanting a 'support gay marriage' message would be gay than straight? In that sense, it IS to do with sexual orientation.

No it isn’t fair to say that. Shitloads of straight people supported equal marriage. It wouldn’t have passed otherwise. Would someone buying a Christmas pudding be more likely to be Christian than not?

MissTrinket, you should be ashamed of making that comparison.