Bakery refuses to make "gay cake"; faces legal action

Scroll to see replies

Good

the sooner people learn you can't deny someone goods and services because of their sexuality (or in this case your objections to their sexuality) the better

The didn't not serve them simply because they were gay. They didn't want to make a cake which displayed a political message which they did not support, in this case regarding gay marriage.

The prosecution is absolutely absurd. Even if you accept it should be illegal to deny people services because of their sexuality, you surely cannot compel people to participate in a political cause.

Reply 81

TurboCretin

Original post by Radicalathiest

Then some Christians need to move with the times I'm afraid (My Parents are Christians and they have no issues with gay people getting married and it’s through them that I have my attitude for tolerance and acceptance so NO, not all Christians are bigoted homophobes).

But I do as does the law (or maybe we don't know yet)

It's really quite simple we live in a world where everyone should be able to expect the same level of service. if you fell you are unable to provide this service because you don't like blacks or you hate gays then the best thing to do is find a job where you can have this opinions with them impacting on others

I agree that the views of the bakery are unsustainable in the 21st century, but regardless of the discussion we just had this case isn't discrimination against the customer. It's the difference between refusing to make a gay man's birthday cake (discrimination against the customer) and refusing to make a gay marriage cake for a straight person (not discrimination against the customer). It just so happens that these have been conflated in the news story in question, because the customer was gay man asking for a cake supporting gay marriage.

Further on this point, even if the bakery owners are homophobic, being so isn't illegal. What is illegal is discriminating against customers on the basis of their sexuality, which they have not done.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 82

Dani California

Original post by Novascope

I think this is silly. Why can't they just go to another bakery instead of wasting their time fighting with the owner(s)? If I were refused something because I'm black, damn right I'd be pissed, but I'd tell them to go **** themselves and go to a DIFFERENT bakery, there's hundreds of them. I think a business has the right to refuse whoever and whatever, even though it's sad. I bet almost everyone would feel the same way if they owned a business. Imagine if someone came into your business asking for something that you didn't feel strongly about or believed? Pretty sure you'd refuse them. This is pointless news. Sucks for the couple, but they can just seriously go somewhere else where they'd be happy to take their order :smile:

Thank you! Everyone's so easily butthurt these days.

Reply 83

Dani California

Original post by Marcum

Deuteronomy 22:9, I acknowledge this is the Old Testament, condemns planting of different seeds next to each other. The New Testament, Matthew 5:17, effectively condones the Old Testament and yet I am doubtful the cake shop would have refused a farmer a cake with a picture of both wheat and barley planted next to each other.

Can't believe I just read that. Christians. :rolleyes:

either way, it irrelevant. They do not believe in gay marriage, they should not be forced to appear that they do.

Reply 84

Novascope

Original post by Dani California

Thank you! Everyone's so easily butthurt these days.

I know right! I'm not homophobic at all. If this were any other situation, I'd say the same thing. The bakery refused them because of the cause (the wedding) not because they are gay. If people are saying the bakery should make them the cake then isn't that forcing the bakers to go against their belief which kind of is against their human rights?

Reply 85

UniMastermindBOSS

This is why I dislike some gay people, and I imagine others do too.

I've never had a problem with any personally, but in cases like this, the gay people I know would just go to another bakery.

The person involved in ths story seems to come across as one of those, types of people who reply with, "Yes I'm gay/black/asian/short, etc. Is that why you said no? Is that why you hate me? Do you hate all gay/black/asian/short, etc. people?" every time someone disagrees with them.

Luckily I know not all gay people are like that however.

Reply 86

letsbehonest

Original post by Radicalathiest

But they do

If I were you I'd spend some time looking into the sale of goods act and the Equality act 2000

but there is a good resource

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_home/discrimination_in_goods_and_services/default.asp

Ofc they should serve a gay person..

But the problem here is that they requested a cake to be made for them but the cake goes against the bakeries views.. they shouldn't be obliged to make it if they don't want to.

This isn't a case of refusing to serve because of sexual orientation. It's not like they are saying we don't want to serve you because you are gay.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 87

Dani California

Original post by Novascope

Me neither, but that's ^ what I've been trying to say. It denies the bakers their freedom, in the name of liberty...it makes NO sense!

Reply 88

Skip_Snip

Original post by thesabbath

You want Government-mandated slavery, in other words?

If homosexual lobbyists cannot separate their homosexual politics from their "sexuality" then that is their problem. No one should be forced by law to produce propaganda for a cause with which they do not agree.

If christians cannot separate their religious politics from their business, then then that is their problem.

Reply 89

Radicalathiest

Original post by tengentoppa

They should. It's their business, and they should get to decide whether or not they want to endorse a political message.

Then someone can decide 'Black and proud' is offensive.

And again no they don't according the the sales of goods act and the equality act 2000

Should, could are irrelevent in the eyes of the law

Reply 90

Dani California

Original post by Radicalathiest

Then someone can decide 'Black and proud' is offensive.

And again no they don't according the the sales of goods act and the equality act 2000

Should, could are irrelevent in the eyes of the law

Do you work in legal? You're obsessed with the law. o_O

Reply 91

That Bearded Man

If homosexuals are so disgusted by this refusal, why don't they go to another bakery, I'm sure any bakery doing this could make a fortunate by exploiting the market. Horrifying. I support gay rights, but a private business shouldn't be forced to do something it cannot or will not do. Can I sue the bakery on the Shankill Road for not making a cake with a Tricolour on it?

Reply 92

Radicalathiest

Original post by TurboCretin

Further on this point, even if the bakery owners are homophobic, being so isn't illegal. What is illegal is discriminating against customers on the basis of their sexuality, which they have not done.

I agree this will a test case so it will be interesting to follow but I think the law is quite clear

but we'll have to wait and see :biggrin:

Reply 93

Radicalathiest

Original post by Dani California

Do you work in legal? You're obsessed with the law. o_O

No and yes the law is the law and trying to argue could, should where the law is concerned is irrelevant to the issue

Argue the law is wrong if you like but remember this law also prevents signs like

So we as a society have a choice

do we allow discrimination based on sex, race disability etc... or do we prevent it

I'd rather we prevented discrimination in society rather than allow it :wink:

Equality is the word

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 94

TurboCretin

Original post by Skip_Snip

If christians cannot separate their religious politics from their business, then then that is their problem.

Too true. Personal principles shouldn't get in the way of doing business.

Have you considered a career in banking?

Reply 95

A5ko

It's not like the couple couldn't go to another shop... ****ing hell, what a whiny bitch of a world we live in.

Reply 96

Dani California

Original post by Radicalathiest

So we as a society have a choice

do we allow discrimination based on sex, race disability etc... or do we prevent it

I'd rather we prevented discrimination in society rather than allow it :wink:

Equality is the word

Don't think equality is the issue here, because I think it's been established that they weren't turned away for bein gay. But don't you think FORCING the pro-gay marriage view on the bakers is wrong, and well, inequal?

Reply 97

Radicalathiest

Original post by Dani California

Would you accept the argument if they refused to 'promote' a 'black is proud' cake?

And no one is forcing their views onto them they have been asked to provide a cake with a message the point here is that the message is irrelevant as it breaks no laws

they have decied they do not like the message as it is 'pro gay' and refused the cake

but as I have asked Would you accept the argument if they refused to 'promote' a 'black is proud' cake?

Reply 98

Skip_Snip

Original post by TurboCretin

Have you considered a career in banking?

I have a personality, so no.

Reply 99

JG1233

This isn't really the same as simply refusing to make a cake for a homo-sexual though. They wanted a pro gay marriage slogan on the cake, that is a political issue which it is completely reasonable to be opposed to (unless you don't believe in democracy), and so i would agree in this case the bakery has done nothing wrong. If he would have refused a cake in general because the buyers were homosexual i would agree, but this was a political agenda and so i see no problem if they don't wish to make the cake.

Its hardly the previous hotel case, where the gay couple were refused to stay simply just for being gay and wanting to sleep in the same room, that i would agree is discrimination but i don't see this case and that as being the same.