Gay Cake Case

[Lovelyricepudding]

The ECHR has ruled that their case was inadmissible. The was the case where the supreme Court ruled Christian bakers should not be forced to say/write something they disagreed with.

My understanding is up to now the case has been based on domestic law which is not the remit of the ECHR. In order to bring a case to them they must pursue a human rights case through the domestic courts first.

[title edited by MNHQ at OP's request]

The Supreme Court decision is here. I've only read the précis press version but ironically Ashers did invoke their ECHR rights.

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2017-0020.html

@Elsiebear90

It’s probably “gone on this long” because gay marriage is not just a political opinion it’s about equality and human rights, it’s not the same thing as writing “vote labour” on a cake.

I’m gay and I don’t have sympathy for either side, the cake owners are clearly homophobic and the gay couple were clearly looking to cause trouble. I think both of them are in the wrong, but to refer to objecting to gay marriage and gay rights as merely a difference of political opinion rather than homophobia is disingenuous, homophobia rooted in religion is still homophobia.

I’m gay and I don’t have sympathy for either side, the cake owners are clearly homophobic and the gay couple were clearly looking to cause trouble

You can't have read very thoroughly. There was no gay couple.

It’s probably “gone on this long” because gay marriage is not just a political opinion it’s about equality and human rights, it’s not the same thing as writing “vote labour” on a cake.

It is a political opinion though.

I'm a lesbian and I didn't support gay marriage, and the time I wanted the loopholes (pension rights etc) resolved with regard to Civil Partnership, because I personally didn't want to ape the heterosexuals. I know many gay people agree with me or disagree with me but I am entitled to my opinion.
Now it's done I wouldn't reverse it as there is little point, but not all homosexuals supported the gay marriage legislation put forward by "call me Dave".

It's definitely a political opinion, and no political opinion should be beyond debate just because someone believes their opinion is very important.

And I also didn’t realise that they were asking for a cake that said “support gay marriage.” I think people not familiar with the details tend to assume that the service refused was along the lines of a cake that said “Congratulations Dave and Jonathan” with two little groom figures on it.

IIRC, there was a case fitting that description in the US some years back, which this one often gets confused with. Does anyone have the details?

*at the time

I said it’s not just a political opinion, it’s also about equal rights and human rights.

@TInkyWlnky

I'm with the baker. Where's his freedom to not be forced in to producing something that goes against his religious beliefs. Was there really no other baker who could make this (very cheap) cake? It seems to me a deliberate attempt to undermine the beliefs / rights of others in the hierarchy of 'rights'. I'm not religious. But I find this attack against the baker sickening.

Completely agree

NecessaryScene

The supreme court judgement in this cases references that one - paragraphs 59 - 62.

@Elsiebear90

I said it’s not just a political opinion, it’s also about equal rights and human rights.

But it is just a political opinion. It doesn't matter what it's about. It's an opinion, about politics. Hence, a political opinion.

Sorry I must have read that wrong, when you said “ape the heterosexuals” do you mean you didn’t want us to have equal rights because you personally didn’t want to copy heterosexuals? So no regard for any of us who would quite like to marry our partners then? You just didn’t any of us to have that right because you personally didn’t want to copy straight people?

@Elsiebear90

Sorry I must have read that wrong, when you said “ape the heterosexuals” do you mean you didn’t want us to have equal rights because you personally didn’t want to copy heterosexuals? So no regard for any of us who would quite like to marry our partners then? You just didn’t any of us to have that right because you personally didn’t want to copy straight people?

You clearly have trouble with reading comprehension.

Why do you see my opinion as a personal attack? I'm allowed to disagree with you. You get to vote for what you want, I get to vote for what I want. You get to have your opinions, I get to have my opinions.

Of course it matters what it’s about, especially when you’re talking about equal rights and discrimination.

And yeah, I saw Civil Partnership legislation as monumental, and gay marriage as a pointless sop to certain activists. But if you want to get all upset about my opinion, crack on.

Calm down, I’m just trying to understand your view as it’s quite bizarre, I’ve never met another gay person who doesn’t think we should have equal rights because that would be copying straight people. Is that what you meant when you said “ape the heterosexuals”?

@Elsiebear90

Of course it matters what it’s about, especially when you’re talking about equal rights and discrimination.

No, it doesn't. "It's not just a political opinion, it's about the environment" "It's not just a political opinion, it's about national defence" "It's not just a political opinion, it's about something that I think is really important, so I'm going to elevate it above other political opinions"

It's just a political opinion.

I’m not upset about your opinion I just think your reasoning is bizarre and quite selfish, if you don’t want to get married then don’t, but why try to stop anyone else?

@Elsiebear90

Calm down, I’m just trying to understand your view as it’s quite bizarre, I’ve never met another gay person who doesn’t think we should have equal rights because that would be copying straight people. Is that what you meant when you said “ape the heterosexuals”?

Being able to form a legal union with someone of the same sex is having equal rights. Calling it marriage is a matter of choice. I didn't see the point, I think copying straight weddings (white bridal dresses to signify virginity, giving women away like chattel, etc) is a bit naff. But you do you.

@Elsiebear90

I’m not upset about your opinion I just think your reasoning is bizarre and quite selfish, if you don’t want to get married then don’t, but why try to stop anyone else?

How is it selfish to disagree with you? If there had been a referendum on it and I had voted against and you had voted for, how does that make me selfish?

@babeB

I'm an atheist but people really love to antagonise christians. Nobody what think to go into a Muslim's bakery and demand them write a cake with a message they disagree with

That's it exactly. Christians are being shat upon.

If someone did that to people of any other religious persuasion they'd be called racist.

Anyway do you think companies should have to promote your political opinions because you think they're much more important than other people's political opinions? Because that's what the activist tried to do.

@Lovelyricepudding

Totally agree. It baffles me as to why Christians are so keen to 'turn the other cheek'.

Matthew 5v39
...If someone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also.

Im sure turn the other cheek is supposed to be more about forgiveness. Christians, and all theists have to stay grounded. They can't be blasphemous or deny God and why should they? Especially some guys can get a payout

Only homophobic if they flat out refuse to serve gay customers, of course

@Elsiebear90

I’m not upset about your opinion I just think your reasoning is bizarre and quite selfish, if you don’t want to get married then don’t, but why try to stop anyone else?

I'm heterosexual and married. I have no religious beliefs. I was married in a registry office. I'm struggling to see any difference between what my arrangement is and a civil partnership.

If I were a radical feminist, I suppose I might think getting married perpetuates an oppressive patriarchal system.

Because you’re denying people the option to do something that would make them happy, which has no effect on you what so ever, just because you think “it’s a bit naff to copy straight people”. How can you not see that is selfish? If you don’t want to get married don’t, but why would you want to stop other gay people from doing something that makes them happy and harms no one?

I'm struggling to see any difference between what my arrangement is and a civil partnership.

Very little, but as I said above I wouldn't reverse the law as it stands. I just didn't agree with it when it was being proposed. At the moment both straight and gay people have a choice of marriage or Civil Partnership, and nobody is taking anything away from Elsiebear