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]

@Elsiebear90

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?

Fuck me. I'm not denying anyone anything, please read what I've actually written FFS.

I disagreed at the time that it was necessary. It's now law, and an option for gay people. I was making the point that support for gay marriage wasn't a blanket default position adopted by every homosexual in the UK. Sorry that this confused you so much.

“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.“

Maybe you could try doing some research into the differences between a civil partnership and a marriage. Or maybe you could try to understand why many gay people like having the opinion to get married just like heterosexual couples can rather than only being able to have a civil partnership which is essentially a pseudo marriage created in an attempt to appease us and homophobes.

@Elsiebear90

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?

If one isn't religious what is the significance of "marriage"?

I can see the point of holding out for "marriage" if one believes the contract has some special, additional significance bestowed by one's faith of choice but for anyone with no religious beliefs? What special magic is the word bringing?

I didn't have the option of not being "married" - beyond not getting married obviously but now I might have preferred a civil partnership.

I think you’re very aware that I’m discussing your opinion that if it was down to you at the time you would have prevented gay marriage from becoming legal, because “it’s naff to copy straight people”, thus preventing other gay couple from getting married. I’m clearly aware that we have gay marriage and you did not stop that from happening…

a civil partnership which is essentially a pseudo marriage
That's your opinion, personally I find it offensive

if it was down to you at the time

having an opinion doesn't give me the powers of a dictator, you know

What special magic is the word bringing?

Exactly. I thought similarly at the time

It was created to mimic marriage in an attempt appease gay people and homophobes, giving us the same rights as marriage without it being called marriage. Therefore, it is in essence a pseudo marriage. Hence, why so many gay people were not happy with that being their only option and wanted to get married.

@Elsiebear90

“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.“

Maybe you could try doing some research into the differences between a civil partnership and a marriage. Or maybe you could try to understand why many gay people like having the opinion to get married just like heterosexual couples can rather than only being able to have a civil partnership which is essentially a pseudo marriage created in an attempt to appease us and homophobes.

Marriage is formed by vows, whereas a civil partnership is formed by signing the civil partnership document; and marriages are ended by divorce, whereas civil partnerships are ended by dissolution, although the process is fundamentally the same.

While civil partnerships do not come with the same traditional and religious connotations, the rights and obligations are the same as those of marriage. This extends not only to the available financial provision upon separation but also in respect of the rules of inheritance and available tax entitlements.

“smile having an opinion doesn't give me the powers of a dictator, you know”

Not wanting to discuss your reasons for objecting to gay marriage anymore I take it?

@Elsiebear90

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

Absolutely. The supreme Court agreed - that the bakers' human rights and equal rights meant they could not be compelled to write a political statement that went against their beliefs.

@Elsiebear90

It was created to mimic marriage in an attempt appease gay people and homophobes, giving us the same rights as marriage without it being called marriage. Therefore, it is in essence a pseudo marriage. Hence, why so many gay people were not happy with that being their only option and wanted to get married.

See, it's a difference of opinion. You say Civil Partnership is a pseudo marriage, because it doesn't involve the word marriage. I disagree, because the word marriage is irrelevant to me, and in effect, copying exactly what straight people do seemed naff. I wanted the same legal and financial rights. Not the same words.

You think Civil Partnership was a compromise to appease homophobes, when in fact it was a bloody big deal and was never the foregone conclusion you, with 20/20 hindsight, clearly think it was.

I quite liked having gay relationships recognised in law as important and as legally binding commitments, without having to prove to straight people that we are exactly the same as them. We aren't, and I am proud to be different.

It's moot now because both marriage and Civil Partnership are open to both gay and straight couples, and as I've said now numerous times, if I did suddenly have dictatorial powers I wouldn't reverse the law. It is what it is.

It’s not about proving to straight people we are the same as them, it’s about having the same rights as them, if you can’t see why it’s important for many of us to have equal rights then I can’t see any point in us keep discussing this, you either want equal rights or you don’t. Don’t want a marriage for yourself then fine, but wanting to stop other people from having that when it’s important to them, that’s what I find selfish.

@Elsiebear90

It’s not about proving to straight people we are the same as them, it’s about having the same rights as them, if you can’t see why it’s important for many of us to have equal rights then I can’t see any point in us keep discussing this, you either want equal rights or you don’t. Don’t want a marriage for yourself then fine, but wanting to stop other people from having that when it’s important to them, that’s what I find selfish.

You're being obtuse. I do want equal rights.

Would you tell a straight couple in a Civil Partnership that they were at a disadvantage to a married straight couple?

Tell you what, I won't marry you, and you don't enter into a Civil Partnership with me. Deal?

Interestingly marriage rates are going down generally. Same sex civil partnerships have decreased since the introduction of same sex marriage but equally there is a demand for mixed sex civil partnerships (or as ElsieBear would describe them "pseudo marriages")

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/marriagecohabitationandcivilpartnerships/bulletins/civilpartnershipsinenglandandwales/2020

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/marriagecohabitationandcivilpartnerships/bulletins/marriagesinenglandandwalesprovisional/2018

There were 234,795 marriages in England and Wales in 2018; a decrease of 3.3% compared with 2017 and the lowest since 2009.

I'm still reading and working out what I think about this, but in the judgment, the phrase 'support for living in sin' caught my eye. That's a pretty partisan and emotive phrase and IMO undermines the necessary neutrality of a legal judgment.

“You're being obtuse. I do want equal rights.

Would you tell a straight couple in a Civil Partnership that they were at a disadvantage to a married straight couple?

Tell you what, I won't marry you, and you don't enter into a Civil Partnership with me. Deal?”

How else can I explain it to you? If gay people aren’t allowed to get married and straight people are that’s not equal rights.

Clearly you don’t believe in equal rights if you don’t believe gay people should be allowed to get married, regardless of your reasoning.

If a straight couple’s only option was a civil partnership not a marriage then yes they’re being discriminated against, if they have the option of marriage or a civil partnership and chose the civil partnership then of course they’re not disadvantaged because they chose that option themselves.

@Elsiebear90

It’s not about proving to straight people we are the same as them, it’s about having the same rights as them, if you can’t see why it’s important for many of us to have equal rights then I can’t see any point in us keep discussing this, you either want equal rights or you don’t. Don’t want a marriage for yourself then fine, but wanting to stop other people from having that when it’s important to them, that’s what I find selfish.

What is the difference other than the swearing of vows rather than signing the declaration and possibly a religious aspect at the start of the contract and at the end a marriage is terminated by divorce and a civil partnership by dissolution?

Unless one is say a practising Catholic what rights are being conferred by the magic word "marriage"?

Of course if one were a practising Catholic one's same sex marriage wouldn't be recognised anyway.

I don't understand the attachment to the word marriage, we don't ask straight people to call us husband and wife when we are two women or two men, we don't ask straight people to call us Mr and Mrs when we are Mr and Mr, we don't demand an annulment because we can't conceive naturally in our same sex couple (one of the nastier aspects of straight marriage), but somehow the word marriage is a human rights issue and I'm a big meanie for disagreeing.

Marriage has a long history, not all of it is very nice, particularly for women. Why would I want to copy that? Other people might see it as making it their own, I guess. I'm conscious I'm contributing to a derail here, my only point was that gay marriage in its current form was not supported by every gay or lesbian person in the UK when it was being debated.

How else can I explain it to you? If gay people aren’t allowed to get married and straight people are that’s not equal rights.

Please do some more reading. Straight people couldn't have a Civil Partnership either. There were two different provisions. You clearly thought that was insufficient. That's your opinion. I'm done with you now because this is painful.

@Elsiebear90

“You're being obtuse. I do want equal rights.

Would you tell a straight couple in a Civil Partnership that they were at a disadvantage to a married straight couple?

Tell you what, I won't marry you, and you don't enter into a Civil Partnership with me. Deal?”

How else can I explain it to you? If gay people aren’t allowed to get married and straight people are that’s not equal rights.

Clearly you don’t believe in equal rights if you don’t believe gay people should be allowed to get married, regardless of your reasoning.

If a straight couple’s only option was a civil partnership not a marriage then yes they’re being discriminated against, if they have the option of marriage or a civil partnership and chose the civil partnership then of course they’re not disadvantaged because they chose that option themselves.

You still haven't explained what rights are gained by calling the contract a "marriage" or are lost by a "civil partnership"

You still haven't explained what rights are gained by calling the contract a "marriage" or are lost by a "civil partnership"

Because she doesn't know

If gay people aren’t allowed to get married and straight people are that’s not equal rights.

Of course. And conversely, in the case when straight couples could only get married rather than have a civil partnership, that wasn't equal rights either. Equal rites, if you want.... the legal rights may be the same but there are religious/philosophical differences. There are gay Christian couples who can now get married in some denominations, for whom the difference matters. There are secularist straight couples for whom the difference matters.

Whether you or I care one way or the other is rather besides the point. I'd personally 100% support the campaign for gay marriage, and also 100% support the right of anyone not to be compelled to write something supporting it.

It's the logical, necessary, counterpart to 'I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It'

Stonewall were against gay marriage at one point, weren't they?

Also is the belief that 'facts should "trump" beliefs' also not a religious belief? Or is it a political belief? A moral one? Does it have to directly invoke a God to be a religious belief?

What is the difference other than the swearing of vows rather than signing the declaration and possibly a religious aspect at the start of the contract and at the end a marriage is terminated by divorce and a civil partnership by dissolution?

Unless one is say a practising Catholic what rights are being conferred by the magic word "marriage"?

Of course if one were a practising Catholic one's same sex marriage wouldn't be recognised anyway.

First of all if you’re in a civil partnership you aren’t married, many of us want to be married, marriage has huge cultural significance. Many of us also want to be able to call our partner our wife or husband not just our civil partner, thirdly for many of us it is also the principle of equal rights in that why should we be denied marriage because we are in a same sex relationship? We don’t want to be “othered” and given the option of a pseudo marriage that isn’t a marriage that was created as some sort of compromise to appease homophobes we want the equal right to be married, just as the vast majority of straight couples who get engaged want to be married not in a civil partnership.