Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

565 replies

SummerGems · 10/10/2018 11:46

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?

OP posts:
MaxDArnold · 11/10/2018 13:28

I'd be interested to hear about any actual documented instances of business refusing to provide services because they conflict with the owners non-Christian religious beliefs, and of them getting away with it because it's only Christians who are expected to compromise. Not your friend's friend or something you heard about on Facebook, but something that can be verified. - it's only ever Christian businesses that are targeted like that.

PaulDacrreRimsGeese · 11/10/2018 13:30

That's the sort of claim that requires some evidence max.

MaxDArnold · 11/10/2018 13:33

@PaulDacrreRimsGeese - There's been a number of cases where Christian businesses have been targeted by professional malcontents who ask them to provide goods or services that would compromise their deeply held beliefs. When they refuse it goes to court. It only ever seems to be Christian businesses targeted. I'll wait for you to provide me with proof that's not the case.

PaulDacrreRimsGeese · 11/10/2018 13:36

Not how it works max. If you make a claim it's for you to prove it, not someone else to disprove it. Or admit you can't, of course. Pointing out that there have been Christian businesses who've been involved in equalities claims isn't proof, either. Especially not in NI where there are so very few people who profess a religion other than Christianity.

GerdaLovesLili · 11/10/2018 13:38

Presumably this means that a gay ,left-wing baker can also refuse to make a "President Trump is Great" cake ordered by a well-known homophobe?

Because the baker would also refuse to make it if the person ordering it was gay.

I can't see why this isn't good news.

prh47bridge · 11/10/2018 13:39

I’ve seen statements from some saying how much of a victory this is for free speech

It is.

and how they suddenly feel that as Christians they are finally permitted to admit that being gay is repulsive, a sin

Provided they don't stray into hate speech, Christians, like Moslems, Jews and adherents of those other religions that condemn homosexuality are free to say what they want (although these days it tends to only be fundamentalists that regard gay sex as sinful). This judgement was never going to change that either way. What it does do is say that you cannot force someone who believes homosexuality is sinful to produce materials supporting homosexuality.

hellsbellsmelons · 11/10/2018 13:42

Why the hell did they want a political statement on their wedding cake?
WTF happened to 'Congratulations to a wonderful couple on your wedding day' !!????

4 years!!! 4 wasted years!
They gave them alternatives. They did NOT refuse to make the cake.
They could have decorated it themselves.
What a big friggin' fuss.

I'm glad about the outcome.
The world would be a very dull place if we all had the same thoughts and views.
Although I completely support the LGBT community and their right to marry.
But make it about your day and your wedding and your love for each other. NOT about politics! Angry

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 11/10/2018 13:45

True story: an acquaintance of mine once ordered a cake decorated with the Queen of Hearts playing card. The baker refused to do so, saying that it was satanist.

(It was for a weekly game of Hearts and said acquaintance was tasked with providing the refreshments that week.)

MaxDArnold · 11/10/2018 13:45

Why the hell did they want a political statement on their wedding cake

They didn't - it was a targeted attack on freedom of speech.

prh47bridge · 11/10/2018 13:50

Not how it works max. If you make a claim it's for you to prove it, not someone else to disprove it. Or admit you can't, of course

I'm sorry but, whilst I am not saying Max's thesis is right, he is right about the burden of proof. His claim is that only Christian businesses are targeted. You are claiming he is wrong, so you are clearly arguing that non-Christian businesses are also targeted. It is easy enough to produce evidence of Christian businesses being targeted. You are asking him to prove that there are never any cases against non-Christian businesses. It is impossible to prove that something never happens. By demanding that he provides evidence, you are demanding the impossible. So, if you want to contend that non-Christian businesses are also targeted, it is up to you to provide evidence. You only need to come up with one case and Max's thesis fails.

prh47bridge · 11/10/2018 13:53

it was a targeted attack on freedom of speech

To repeat yet again, this was not a targeted attack. The evidence presented in court was clear that Ashers did not advertise the fact they were a Christian business prior to this incident and Lee was unaware of their religious views when he placed the order. If it had been a targeted attack I'm sure Ashers would have put this into evidence.

hellsbellsmelons · 11/10/2018 13:55

They didn't - it was a targeted attack on freedom of speech.
Aha... Well then I've completely misinterpreted the story.
Ignore my post.
... As you were ...
DOH!!!!

prh47bridge · 11/10/2018 13:56

Why the hell did they want a political statement on their wedding cake

They didn't, but Max is wrong about the reason. It wasn't a wedding cake. It was for a private event organised by QueerSpace to mark the end of Northern Ireland anti-homophobia week and the political momentum towards same sex marriage.

DioneTheDiabolist · 11/10/2018 13:56

It wasn't a wedding cake.

prh47bridge · 11/10/2018 13:57

Well then I've completely misinterpreted the story

Possibly but not for the reason Max gives. Max seems to be convinced this was a targeted attack. The evidence is that it wasn't.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 11/10/2018 13:57

hellsbells, I admire you for admitting you had got hold of the wrong end of the stick. That rarely happens.

pennydrew · 11/10/2018 13:59

PaulDacrreRimsGeese

You are asking him to prove other religions aren’t targeted? How can he prove that?! The onus is actually on you, to provide evidence that his statement is false.

pennydrew · 11/10/2018 14:00

IMO asking them to ice that cake wasn’t a targeted attack on freedom of speech, but clearly taking them to court was.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 11/10/2018 14:00

if (Christians') beliefs weren’t abhorrent then perhaps people wouldn’t expect them to take a more real world view

Of course you're entirely free to express your loathing of Christianity, just as some might criticise other faiths, but by the same token - and no matter how unwelcome this is - you can't force anyone else to agree with your views

I guess this court case might not have been such a bad thing after all if it helps some to realise that they simply don't get to dictate how others should think, no matter how strident they are or how loud they shout

SenecaFalls · 11/10/2018 14:01

Why the hell did they want a political statement on their wedding cake?

As others have pointed out, it wasn't a wedding cake. Same sex marriage was, and still is, not legal in NI, which, in response to a couple of previous posts, does make gay people second class citizens in NI.

Kr1stina · 11/10/2018 14:03

I guess this court case might not have been such a bad thing after all if it helps some to realise that they simply don't get to dictate how others should think, no matter how strident they are or how loud they shout

This is an excellent point.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 11/10/2018 14:05

I guess this court case might not have been such a bad thing after all if it helps some to realise that they simply don't get to dictate how others should think, no matter how strident they are or how loud they shout

Seconding Kr1stina.

MaxDArnold · 11/10/2018 14:09

Why do social justice warriors tie themselves in knots trying to justify suppressing people's freedom of speech or belief?

BigChocFrenzy · 11/10/2018 14:20

Um, people on the right or with Christian views are just as keen to restrict the freedome of others
e.g. in NI keeping abortion illegal and not allowing Equal Marriage

or re freedom of speech: a mass circulation right wing news paper calling someone an Enemy of the People is not exactly accepting different voews

Those of an authoritarian bent may be of the left, the right, religious, vegan / omnivore ...

It is probably a psychological characteristic, rather than being related to one's place on the political or religious spectrum

AuntBeastie · 11/10/2018 14:23

I agree with the ruling (though not with the bigoted Christian bakers) but absolutely creasing with laughter at people trying to argue that ‘social justice warriors’ are a threat to free speech when you only have to look at Trump to see the the far right is the greatest proponent of state-controlled media