Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Same sex marriage and cake.

  • #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,414 Awkward Badger


    Recently there was a case of a bakery declining to make a cake ordered by an LGBT group promoting same sex marriage and receiving a letter from the Equality Commission in NI stating the bakery had breached the law and had discriminated against the individual who placed the order based on his sexuality, demanding the customer be compensated or face legal proceedings. This has been discussed at length in AH but has gone absolutely nowhere. So I thought maybe I could put three of the main points I found in the discussion to the people here and see what people thought about them.

    The main points of contention that seem to have ground discussion to a halt and dragged it in circles for days has been the disagreement on:
    1. Whether or not the campaign by the organisation QueerSpace which ordered the cake and the message of "Support gay marriage" with their logo can be defined as political.
    2. Whether or not the refusal of the order based on the message on the cake and the bakery's reluctance to help promote such a message based on religious beliefs can be deemed discrimination on the grounds of sexuality against the individual who placed the order.
    3. Whether or not there is any valid reason to be anti same sex marriage which seems to underpin the view that direct or indirect it was discriminatory to refuse to make the cake because being anti same sex marriage was in essence homophobic and discriminatory against homosexuals.

    My view on those three points is that:
    • The message and the campaign is political. I take political to mean in relation to politics and state affairs including any changing of the laws. The group is seeking a change in legislation in NI and they are seeking support with the message. So I believe the bakery are correct in stating its a political message.
    • I personally cannot see how refusal to make a cake with such a message can be deemed to be discrimination based on the sexuality of the individual who ordered it. I think any person of any sexuality could have ordered that cake and it would have been refused. Combined with the issue being as I believe to be in relation to a political message I think the Equality Commission were wrong to infer that the customer was discriminated against based on his sexuality.
    • As far as there being no valid reason to be anti same sex marriage and any argument being inherently homophobic and discriminatory I don't think anyone can make such a claim. I think the issue is about the definition of the institution of marriage rather than its about denying others rights to the same privileges that come with that. Denying same sex couples the right to those privileges whatever they may be is discriminatory. But marriage is not the only way to attain them. The same status can be achieved through civil partnership and if not then civil partnership can be redefined to give them. So while there are plenty who no doubt are homophobic and don't feel as if same sex couples should have the same rights I don't think every single anti same sex argument is inherently homophobic or discriminatory.


Comments



  • There are some philosophical questions which are so diluted by the reigning political discourse that even asking them is to put one's already infirm grasp on truth in dire peril.

    The use of cake, which is beloved to us all, and gives us comfort and joy, should not be used to divide us, but to bring us together.




  • I'm always confused as to why a homosexual person would want to be recognised by a god and accepted, when this "being" is a bigot and homophobic.
    But I do think people should have the right to make a civil partnership.
    That's what I would do if I saw a legal reason to do so.
    When you get married you do so before a god. When you get married you also can sign a legal document, which is a civil partnership.
    The marriage part to me seems to be just a religious thing.

    Unless I missed something, it seems a little similar to trying to join a hardline nazi group when you are everything they stand against. Why would someone want that?




  • Torakx wrote: »
    I'm always confused as to why a homosexual person would want to be recognised by a god and accepted, when this "being" is a bigot and homophobic.
    But I do think people should have the right to make a civil partnership.
    No same-sex-marriage advocates are looking for the right to a religious marriage (well, virtually none of them are). They are looking for the right to a civil marriage (not partnership). When a heterosexual couple get married, they have a civil marriage and, optionally, a religious marriage. Homosexual couples want to avail of a civil marriage as well.

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using post-migration Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, and a dark mode setting)





  • I'm a little confused.
    My use of the word partnership is with a legal document in mind. A contract.
    I had considered the word Marriage to be the religious side of things.
    But on looking up the definition for marriage...

    "The legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship."

    Isn't marriage just a civil partnership?




  • Torakx wrote: »
    Isn't marriage just a civil partnership?
    It could be called a type of civil partnership in layman's terms.

    In the Irish legal system, civil partnership is defined to be one thing, marriage is defined to be another. Civil partnerships have less rights than marriages. Civil partnerships are available to heterosexual and homosexual couples, marriages are only available to heterosexual couples

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using post-migration Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, and a dark mode setting)



  • Advertisement


  • 28064212 wrote: »
    It could be called a type of civil partnership in layman's terms.

    In the Irish legal system, civil partnership is defined to be one thing, marriage is defined to be another. Civil partnerships have less rights than marriages. Civil partnerships are available to heterosexual and homosexual couples, marriages are only available to heterosexual couples
    This is indeed a lot of semantics isn't it!
    Now I am curious what the actual differences are between civil partnership and marriage in heterosexuals for example.

    The only basis I had for thinking homosexuals shouldn't get married, was that marriage was before a god(which I don't believe exists, but whohates homosexuals.. it seems contradictory in that sense) and a civil partnership was the legal contract itself.
    But since learning marriage is actually the legal contract... whatthe hell is a civil partnership!?
    I know... I will google it, if no reply comes :)

    For what it's worth, I think we are all natural people. Anyone should be allowed to make a contract.
    Now regarding the benefits of said contracts, I am not sure.
    As a hyppthetical example...
    Maybe the state gives some allowances for married couples based on the premise they are capable of having children(setting adoption aside for this example). I don't know of the real reasons, but would be interested in hearing all about this.




  • Torakx wrote: »
    This is indeed a lot of semantics isn't it!
    Now I am curious what the actual differences are between civil partnership and marriage in heterosexuals for example.
    Civil partnerships came into existence in Ireland with the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. This gave same-sex couples, on registration of a civil partnership, equality (by and large) for taxation and social welfare purposes. However, it does not give equality in many other areas, most notably adoption, parental rights, and inheritance. The Marriage Equality group published an analysis of the differences.

    NB: I was incorrect earlier when I said hetero couples could avail of civil partnerships. Only same-sex couples can. I was mixing it up with cohabitation rights, enacted under the same bill. And that's a whole other ridiculous mess

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using post-migration Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, and a dark mode setting)





  • For copyright reasons the shop should never have made a Bert and Ernie cake, if the shop didn't understand copyright it should not be open.




  • 28064212 wrote: »
    Civil partnerships came into existence in Ireland with the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. This gave same-sex couples, on registration of a civil partnership, equality (by and large) for taxation and social welfare purposes. However, it does not give equality in many other areas, most notably adoption, parental rights, and inheritance. The Marriage Equality group published an analysis of the differences.

    NB: I was incorrect earlier when I said hetero couples could avail of civil partnerships. Only same-sex couples can. I was mixing it up with cohabitation rights, enacted under the same bill. And that's a whole other ridiculous mess

    I've only read about halfway through and already it's fu$ked up.
    That's probalby a result of having TD's who have no idea about anything usually, the right to change and choose on these matters.
    an ethical issue will turn immediately into a political issue.
    Really someone who is an expert on this stuff should be making those decisions.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement