Cake is a human right - county court in Belfast holds it is illegal to refuse to make 'Support Gay Marriage' cake

[InnTheJungle]

It seems a bit of a dubious ruling really.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32791239

'The judge said Ashers is "conducting a business for profit", it is not a religious group.'

Lots of business are run for profit, but it doesn't mean they must maximise profits at all costs.

It was held that the bakery discriminated against the purchaser who wanted 'Support Gay Marriage' printed on a cake.

Which is a political slogan which either gays or heterosexuals could use.

I would feel more comfortable with the ruling had they simply refused to make, say, a standard wedding cake for a gay couple.

Although of course gay marriage is illegal in Northern Ireland.

I am not really clear what the boundaries are here, if you are an ISIS supporter can you go and get a pro-jihad cake made as part of your religious rights?

How can the law of the land have decided that refusing to support a campaign for gay marriage is illegal, while gay marriage is in fact illegal in that country?

The court has decided nothing of the sort. The business offers bespoke cakes, which means that the customer requests the content on the cake and the bakery obliges. That does not mean the bakery is endorsing that content, merely that they are producing a product to a customers specification. They have not been found guilty of refusing to support a campaign for gay marriage, they have been found guilty of discriminating against a customer.

Gay marriage is illegal, but as with any law, campaigning for a change in law is not illegal. For them to not make that cake says to me that they not only disagree with gay marriage, but also with the democratic process of this country.

Surely, taking a stance against a campaign you disagree with is also part of the democratic process?

The judge said yesterday in the ruling that 'they must have been aware of the customer's sexuality' or something along those lines, and it made me wonder, would it have been legally acceptable for them to refuse the same cake if the person ordering it had been heterosexual? Because they wouldn't have been considered to be refusing a service based on the customer's own sexuality?

Comparing paedophilia with homosexuality is deeply offensive.

ok - i'll reword
""How can 2 people who love each other getting married offend you?""

to

"How can 2 consenting adults who love each other getting married offend you?"

that better?

Surely, taking a stance against a campaign you disagree with is also part of the democratic process?

Not when it breaks discrimination law.

Although treacles point is a good one.

I didnt want to cause a fight by mentioning that Greythorne - some people dont want you to disagree with them...

I always say
"Don't like gay marriage?, dont have one!"

Seriously what the fuck does it have to do with you if 2 men/women want to get married? how on earth can their marriage affect your one?

Dragon... I 100% agree with you.

Cup Cakes.

Why didn't they order cup cakes, as cup cakes are for sharing, and who could EVER be offended by cup cakes?

(My thought for the day .... on the way to the nurse for my meds.)

For those who agree with the court, would you also have agreed if the slogan involved had been "Save Ulster from sodomy"? After all, religious beliefs are protected under discrimination legislation so refusal to make such a cake would, by the same reasoning used in this case, have discriminated against those with religious belief. So if the bakery had refused to make such a cake the court should have found against them.

To be honest I suspect the court would not have found against a bakery who refused to make a cake with the slogan "Save Ulster from sodomy". Which means that LBGT rights are being treated as trumping religious rights. Although I suspect the verdict would have been different if the bakery had been Moslem rather than Christian.

That is why I disagree with the court in this case. If the bakery had refused to serve the customers at all because they were gay that would be discrimination and the courts would be right to take action. But finding against the bakery for refusing to put a particular slogan on the cake is, in my view, taking us down a dangerous path.

The law is there to protect everyone, not just those whom we like or agree with. This decision in my view subverts that principle.

So you can now force someone to bake you a cake? How ridiculous.

Perhaps the bakers should just have charged such an extortionate price for the 'artwork' that the customers cancelled their order!

For them to not make that cake says to me that they not only disagree with gay marriage, but also with the democratic process of this country.

Really? Would you still be saying that if they had refused to make a cake that said "Support Sharia law" given that some Moslems want the UK to be ruled by Sharia law? How about if they had refused to make a cake saying "Ban abortion" given that there are campaigns to achieve that end? Or should we try "Support the BNP"?

The judge said yesterday in the ruling that 'they must have been aware of the customer's sexuality' or something along those lines

I would regard that as one of the major flaws in the judgement. The reasoning seems to be that only someone who is homosexual would order a cake with the slogan "Support gay marriage" and therefore refusing to produce such a cake automatically means the business is discriminating against homosexuals. The argument fails if the customer is heterosexual. I don't see why the bakers "must" have been aware of the customer's sexuality. Is a baker asked to produce a cake with a slogan that they consider offensive now expected to determine the customer's sexuality before deciding whether or not to accept the order?

Personally I support gay marriage. In the right circumstances I might order such a cake myself. But I really don't see that it is in any way discriminatory to refuse to bake a cake with a slogan supporting gay marriage. Refusing to serve gay customers would be discriminatory but in my view this is not.

"How can 2 consenting adults who love each other getting married offend you?"

Bigamy? I'm not a fan of that either.

Really? Would you still be saying that if they had refused to make a cake that said "Support Sharia law" given that some Moslems want the UK to be ruled by Sharia law? How about if they had refused to make a cake saying "Ban abortion" given that there are campaigns to achieve that end? Or should we try "Support the BNP"?

Yes I would. Because producing a cake with those slogans on is not going to ban abortions or introduce sharia law. But the person wanting to campaign for those things is entitled to do so. Do I agree with banning abortion or sharia law? Well no I don't agree with either of those things. But if I was in a business my personal beliefs have no bearing on my work.

Completely agree with VoyageofDad's post. We have come a long way since then, but sadly not far enough.

I've been round the houses trying to work out which side of the fence to fall on this one too. It did bring back into question the b and b case where the couple didn't want to accomodate a gay couple in their house for money.

For my own set of morals I have decided that the cake case is right and the European court of human rights is right in the case of the B and B owners (they should be able to say who stays under their roof).

The cake shop is a chain with a reasonable number of employees (80 over 9 sites). If the boss of the business was uncomfortable with the slogan then with a diverse workforce an employee could have been asked to make the graphic for the cake. If the workfore lacks any diversity then there is possibly inherent discrimination in the operation of the whole business from staff recruitment to management.

In a micro business, like the B&B case, its hard to have diversity to accomodate all. Unless someone is in a monopoly situation (very unlikely for a micro business) then the customer has choice to go elsewhere if the supplier is not being accomodating.

Well if you agree with ruling, do you think a Bakery with employees who support gay pride should be forced to make a cake that says "end gay pride parades". I don't. I don't think printers or sign makers have to make anything they don't want to.

I don't think the Ashers have to put slogans on cakes that they disagree with either. From what I read they didn't say they found it offensive, just they didn't want to put a slogan on a cake when they were opposed to that slogan. The person putting in the order could have been heterosexual.

It was a crap design. And for that reason alone the bakery was not unreasonable.

I also think a bakery should be allowed to refuse to make any cake if they don't fancy making it...I've been refused cakes several times for various reasons.

If the baker was refusing to serve the person because they were gay that would be totally different.

I feel for the business owners. From the moment the order was placed they were in trouble one way or the other. A refusal to make the cake resulted in a court case and people boycotting their business.

If they HAD made the cake, you can be sure that they would still have had their reputation trashed and their business damaged, because the finger would have been pointed at them as being hypocrites, willing to accept money to produce a cake supporting something that their religion forbids them to support. What a nightmare situation to be in.

Would they really treacle? I don't think so. I think if they had made the cake none of us would have known anything about any of this.

Plenty of Christians seem to be able to be tolerant and accepting folk, regardless of what their religion forbids. I am not sure why some people seem to think their religious beliefs somehow cancel out the law.

I think there is a distinction between an entity (the business) and an individual.

The business in this instance is made up of 80 plus individuals. If all those individuals hold one view, that is discriminatory, then I believe the question is does that business as a whole have significant discrimination issues.

I was playing through scenarios with someone I like to debate with earlier. Just to go to extreme reactions and provoke thought we discussed a Muslim bakery being asked to produce a head of Muhamed cake. Would it be discriminatory for them to refuse? I don't believe it would because the customer is not a clearly identifiable minority group prone to discrimination.

A band of end gay pride activists as in soontobemumofthree scenario isn't a minority group either so I assume it wouldn't be discrimination to turn them down.

I'm actually confused by this..... if instead of "Support Gay Marriage" the proposed cake design had been "Support Euthanasia" would the court ruling have been the same?

People wanting euthanasia aren't a recognised minority group so I'd guess not.

InnTheJungle Wed 20-May-15 19:18:28
"How can 2 consenting adults who love each other getting married offend you?"

Bigamy? I'm not a fan of that either.

are you a politician? answering anything but the question.

why are you against bigamy? if all parties involved have full knowledge of and consent to, then why not

but apart from that - (and your quite petty 'jokes') why does 2 people who want to be married to each other and no one else, and are both adults and consenting and the same sex affect YOU? how does that stop YOU doing anything you have always done, what is the direct affect on YOU?

That is, if you can actually answer the question