Gay Cake Controversy!

gozunda

gmisk wrote: »

What charity I wonder?
Is it a charity like the way the íona institute is a charity?

Afaik the Christian Institute of the UK have paid for all the bakeries legal costs etc and even made a fairly slick video before the first court case which had lots of onions and included a photo of the cake design the bakery didn't bake

There's some more detail buried on the CI somewhere on this thread if you search ....

gozunda

wexie wrote: »

I think a better comparison would be a restaurant that will happily serve black customers but won't let them put up a black power banner.

And I'm okay with that to be honest. From what I understand the bakery would have happily supplied a cake, they just didn't agree with the message the customer wanted on the cake. I would imagine it would have been no different if I had wanted a cake that said 'god is a dick'

No cake with or without a message was offered afaik...the whole order was declined.

As for your rather tongue in cheek "god is dick" analogy just like all the hate crime - nazi stuff offered in thread- that is incorrect.

Blasphemous libel ....is an offence under the common law of Northern Ireland, it is a statutory offence in Canada and New Zealand, and it has been abolished in England and Wales. It consists of the publication of material which exposes the Christian religion to scurrility, vilification, ridicule ...

So no - not a comparable sentiment

wexie

gozunda wrote: »

No cake with or without a message was offered afaik...the whole order was declined.

As for your rather tongue in cheek "god is dick" analogy just like all the nazi stuff offered in thread- that is incorrect.

So no - not a comparable sentiment

Oh..well...in most civilized countries (that is, without a blasphemy law) the point would have stood.

donkeykong5

suicide_circus wrote: »

will costs be awarded against the complainant?

Hopefully.

pleas advice

UrbanFret wrote: »

Good to see someone unwilling to bend over for the gay community.

tonycascarino

Great decision. It is a sign that the world is not completely screwed yet.

tonycascarino

gozunda wrote: »

Yah religous nutters still rule yeah!

Delighted the attention seekers didn't win. I am thinking of throwing a party to celebrate this monumental verdict.

gozunda

wexie wrote: »

Oh..well...in most civilized countries (that is, without a blasphemy law) the point would have stood.

Doubt it - that particular sentiment most likley would fall under hate crime type laws imo

gozunda

tonycascarino wrote: »

Delighted for them. I am thinking of throwing a party to celebrate this monumental verdict.

Surely a prayer meeting or a good mass would be more suitable no? Can't have any of that frivolity or gluttony type stuff going on now

wexie

gozunda wrote: »

Doubt it - that particular sentiment most likley would fall under hate crime type laws imo

I'm trying to figure out what it is you're trying to say?

Do you think that in this or a similar scenario the bakery/business should have just put any message on the product regardless of whether or not they agree or believe the message to be correct?

What if you had a business and were forced to write a message on a product that said

'carnists are evil, vegans rock'?

And by the way I don't think that sentiment should be covered under hatecrimes in any civilized country either, there are plenty of arguments to be made that god is a dick (if he/she exists of course)

pleas advice

tonycascarino wrote: »

I am thinking of throwing a party to celebrate this monumental verdict.

will there be cake?

gozunda

wexie wrote: »

I'm trying to figure out what it is you're trying to say?
Do you think that in this or a similar scenario the bakery/business should have just put any message on the product regardless of whether or not they agree or believe the message to be correct?
What if you had a business and were forced to write a message on a product that said
'carnists are evil, vegans rock'?
And by the way I don't think that sentiment should be covered under hatecrimes in any civilized country either, there are plenty of arguments to be made that god is a dick (if he/she exists of course)

Lol you're forgetting 'carnists are just a figment of some deranged individuals imagination. Not against the arguments but publicised sentiments such as 'god is a dick' (your words') directed at specific group ie those who believe in 'god etc are not viewed as usually acceptable afaik...

ohnonotgmail

suicide_circus wrote: »

will costs be awarded against the complainant?

The Equality Commission in northern ireland are covering the costs. £500,000 so far.

paw patrol

great decision.

I wonder which side the right-on brigade would be on if a muslim refused to serve alcohol to a gay man.

their little heads would explode doing the permutations

golfball37

ittakestwo wrote: »

Dont think it's over just yet. Think this might finally end in Strasbourg.

There will be a film no doubt to about it in the future.

It’ll have to get there before March 29th cos after that it’s none of the eus business

ohnonotgmail

golfball37 wrote: »

It’ll have to get there before March 29th cos after that it’s none of the eus business

No they dont. The ECHR is not an EU entity.

wexie

gozunda wrote: »

Lol you're forgetting 'carnists are just a figment of some deranged individuals imagination. Not against the arguments but publicised sentiments such as 'god is a dick' (your words') directed at specific group ie those who belueve in 'god etc are not viewed as usually acceptable afaik...

Why not?

It wouldn't be aimed at or directed at any particular group? What if I wanted a cake that said just that to serve at the funeral of someone who died to young?

The point is, we don't all have to agree, it's okay for me to disagree with someone who is religious. That shouldn't be legislated for or against.

It's not okay for me to treat them differently because of it (that would be discrimination).

So while I in no way agree with the sentiments of the bakery, that doesn't mean I don't agree they should be allowed to have that sentiment.

Of course there will be lots of comparisons now with regards race, religion, sexuality etc. etc. which is fine I guess.

I just feel that one (somewhat) reasonably held belief doesn't and shouldn't trump another (somewhat) reasonably held belief.

Of course you can then start arguing over what's reasonable etc. etc.

This conversation can go on and on, and there are plenty of people that will happily go out of their way to make sure it does. And plenty of people that will happily fight to make sure it's their belief impinging on someone else's and not the other way around.

gozunda

wexie wrote: »

Why not?
....

Not to get too convoluted into that (it's all already discussed 'as tedium' in the thread already. I'm saying that the way it is in a lot of countries either under blashemy or hate crime legislation. I personally wouldn't try your example just to test the waters lol But hey go ahead if you want too!

TheValeyard

paw patrol wrote: »

great decision.

I wonder which side the right-on brigade would be on if a muslim refused to serve alcohol to a gay man.

their little heads would explode doing the permutations

I remember a courtcase related to this few years back. A Muslim does not have to serve Alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or supermarket.

gozunda

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

I remember a courtcase related to this few years back. A Muslim does not have to serve Alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or supermarket.

There was an ethnic type restaurant in a town near me that always served beer or wine by the glass etc. A while ago they were taken over by some more staunch co religionists and no alcohol is served on the premises anymore....

facehugger99

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

I remember a courtcase related to this few years back. A Muslim does not have to serve Alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or supermarket.

Unfortunately, that's the way we're heading.

There was a similar case in a Local Authority where there was a ruling that a Born again Christian was discriminated against because he was stopped from preaching at work.

http://www.thejournal.ie/born-again-christian-tipperary-council-1583009-Jul2014/

Work is work - and religion shouldn't be brought into it.

While I like the idea of the SJW snowflakes getting a kicking in this case it still rubs me up wrong.

If your job is to serve food and drink, serve the food and drink.

If you're a Civil Engineer in the Council, do some maths and stop trying to convert people to your bull**** religion.

And if your job is to bake cakes, just fcuking bake them!

Spook_ie

tonycascarino wrote: »

Delighted the attention seekers didn't win. I am thinking of throwing a party to celebrate this monumental verdict.

With cake or not?

Spook_ie

facehugger99 wrote: »

Unfortunately, that's the way we're heading.

There was a similar case in a Local Authority where there was a ruling that a Born again Christian was discriminated against because he was stopped from preaching at work.

http://www.thejournal.ie/born-again-christian-tipperary-council-1583009-Jul2014/

Work is work - and religion shouldn't be brought into it.

While I like the idea of the SJW snowflakes getting a kicking in this case it still rubs me up wrong.

If your job is to serve food and drink, serve the food and drink.

If you're a Civil Engineer in the Council, do some maths and stop trying to convert people to your bull**** religion.

And if your job is to bake cakes, just fcuking bake them!

What if your job is a priest?

Capt'n Midnight

What about the copyright on the images of Bert and Ernie ?

suicide_circus

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What about the copyright on the images of Bert and Ernie ?

that's a legal gay area

Galwayguy35

It would have worked out cheaper for the 2 lads to bake their own cake.

The legal costs must be in the hundreds of thousands by now.

tretorn

It would have but then they would have missed the opportunity to bully someone who didnt want to bake a gay cake.

dxhound2005

Mr McArthur says that Mr Lee is welcome as a customer in all of Ashers outlets.

gozunda

Spook_ie wrote: »

What if your job is a priest?

That's a vocation - not a job afaik ...

Nekarsulm

gmisk wrote: »

He targeted the shop? Any proof of that?
The actual rulings say the opposite.. ... He had no idea it was 'Christian' bakery.
But hey who needs facts really when you can make up rubbish.

Of course he targeted the shop.
Its called "Asher's" for crying out loud!
Asher was one of Jacobs sons in the Old Testament. As Jacob was dying, he blessed his sons, and of Asher he said " his cakes will be fat, and he will be the baker of royal Dainties"
Well known family in the more religeous circles of Belfast, and well known association between their business and the biblicial story behind the buisnesses name.