Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anti-gay legislation proposed in Northern Ireland

Options
24567…17

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    If you're in business why would you refuse business?

    I wouldn't if at all possible.

    I would only refuse for purely practical reasons.

    Manpower, request not in my skillset, potential for job not to be profitable etc etc


  • Options
    #33
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,120 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Its the unionists again, always the bloody unionists. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #34
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    List some valid reasons...

    Sorry we can't fulfill that order.
    We are all booked up.
    We have no tables left.
    Members only.

    Saying we can't fulfill that order because you're a ****ing homo is different.


  • Options
    #35
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Daith wrote: »

    Saying we can't fulfill that order because you're a ****ing homo is different.

    Incorrect.

    They disagreed with gay marriage, that is all.
    Don't think that should ever be considered a crime.


  • Options
    #36
    keeponhurling
    Registered Users Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭keeponhurling


    From the OP it seems to say the baker refused the cake cos it had a gay slogan, rather than because the customer was gay.

    The law doesn't seem that bad to me.

    The thread title "anti-gay legislation" also seems a bit misleading


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Incorrect.

    They disagreed with gay marriage, that is all.
    Don't think that should ever be considered a crime.

    I never said that's what the owners said. No need to put words in my mouth or jump to conclusions.

    keeponhurling wrote: »
    The law doesn't seem that bad to me.

    The thread title "anti-gay legislation" also seems a bit misleading

    Hold on. The law they are talking about is a new law so you would be permitted to not to do business based on the sexuality of the customer. Not just slogans. That doesn't seem bad?


  • Options
    #38
    md23040
    Registered Users Posts: 479 ✭✭md23040


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    List some valid reasons...

    Scenario - You are related to Alan Hennings, the British aid worker recently beheaded and you own a bakery. A bunch of Muslims come into your bakery and ask for a cake with an ISIS flag on it with the slogan Death to the West. Are you obliged to make that cake or should the full force of the law be used to pursue you?

    Or someone goes into Finglas bakery asks for a Union Jack cake with some derogatory anti-Irish or anti Catholic slogans. Neither of these things might be illegal under the terms of the law.

    Lets get this into context - someone went out of their way to be offended and knew the consequences. The Bakery didn't refuse to make them a cake on the grounds of their sexual orientation and where happy to bake the cake but not supply the slogan. They should be fully within their rights to refuse to not include any slogan - same as the above examples, or forcing a Muslim cafe to make you a bacon buttie even if you provide the bacon.

    The law will not be enacted because it is impossible to police something so subjective that can not be measured, but equally it is ridiculous the equality commission and PC brigade taking action. As said the laws as ass and other bakeries could consider the business.


  • Options
    #39
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    md23040 wrote: »
    Scenario - You are related to Alan Hennings, the British aid worker recently beheaded and you own a bakery. A bunch of Muslims come into your bakery and ask for a cake with an ISIS flag on it with the slogan Death to the West. Are you obliged to make that cake or should the full force of the law be used to pursue you?

    And the answer isn't to create a law that would mean you are free to discriminate against Muslims.

    The answer would be that business are not required to print slogans or messages they disagree with.

    It's quite an over reaction from the people behind the new bill.


  • Options
    #40
    floggg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,820 ✭✭✭floggg


    md23040 wrote: »
    Scenario - You are related to Alan Hennings, the British aid worker recently beheaded and you own a bakery. A bunch of Muslims come into your bakery and ask for a cake with an ISIS flag on it with the slogan Death to the West. Are you obliged to make that cake or should the full force of the law be used to pursue you?

    Or someone goes into Finglas bakery asks for a Union Jack cake with some derogatory anti-Irish or anti Catholic slogans. Neither of these things might be illegal under the terms of the law.

    Lets get this into context - someone went out of their way to be offended and knew the consequences. The Bakery didn't refuse to make them a cake on the grounds of their sexual orientation and where happy to bake the cake but not supply the slogan. They should be fully within their rights to refuse to not include any slogan - same as the above examples, or forcing a Muslim cafe to make you a bacon buttie even if you provide the bacon.

    The law will not be enacted because it is impossible to police something so subjective that can not be measured, but equally it is ridiculous the equality commission and PC brigade taking action. As said the laws as ass and other bakeries could consider the business.

    Depends. If you were happily make cakes wishing death to other people's or ethnic groups you could well have a problem. You'd need to have a clear and objective policy setting out what death cakes are and aren't acceptable which was applied equally and consistently, and show that the decision was one that wasn't based on race, religion or political* views.

    If however you had a general policy against death cakes applied equally to all then you wouldn't have any problem.

    Of course, actually considering what the law requires isn't half as much fun as coming up with far fetched and absurd scenarios. Pretty sure ISIS members in NI aren't dumb enough to actually order ISIS themes death cakes. Seems the quickest way to get on a terrorism watch list I can possibly think of.


    * I belive NI legislation covers discrimination on grounds of political views (which is prudent given the divisive political history there).


  • Options
    #41
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Nobody will let them eat cake...so we need a Revolution!


    Didn't realise that Ashers were the only bakery in Belfast. It's not like this could be a specific target case...I'm sure that man/group has no specific agenda other than Justice.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    spiralism
    Registered Users Posts: 6,299 ✭✭✭spiralism


    The DUP in NI are by a distance the most far right party with any semblance of power in Europe, or anywhere i can think of from the top of my head for that matter. They'd make Nigel Farage cringe. Ideologically at the very least on a par with the likes of the BNP, Front National or PVV if not worse.


  • Options
    #43
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Didn't realise that Ashers were the only bakery in Belfast. It's not like this could be a specific target case

    Once again, the only victims of homophobia are the homophobes.


  • Options
    #44
    FairytaleGirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 663 ✭✭✭FairytaleGirl


    But if I were to pass it would mean taking a huge step backwards for equality. It's cake now, it could be refusing me and my girlfriend a double room (or a room at all) in a hotel next week, or refusing to lease us a one bedroom apartment next month
    Etc etc


  • Options
    #45
    Uncle Ruckus
    Registered Users Posts: 203 ✭✭Uncle Ruckus


    hfallada wrote: »
    How is that England is liberal and yet NI is so backwards. They both have Church of Ireland/Catholics. But their social views are literally polar opposites.

    Most of the Protestants in N.I. are not Church of Ireland/England. They are Presbyterians/ Scottish dissenters. They take the bible literally and super serious.


  • Options
    #46
    spiralism
    Registered Users Posts: 6,299 ✭✭✭spiralism


    FairytaleGirl wrote: »
    But if I were to pass it would mean taking a huge step backwards for equality. It's cake now, it could be refusing me and my girlfriend a double room (or a room at all) in a hotel next week, or refusing to lease us a one bedroom apartment next month
    Etc etc

    This is the main issue. It legally would allow a bar to put up a sign saying "no gays" for example


  • Options
    #47
    floggg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,820 ✭✭✭floggg


    FairytaleGirl wrote: »
    But if I were to pass it would mean taking a huge step backwards for equality. It's cake now, it could be refusing me and my girlfriend a double room (or a room at all) in a hotel next week, or refusing to lease us a one bedroom apartment next month
    Etc etc

    Or medical treatment...


  • Options
    #48
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Daith wrote: »
    Once again, the only victims of homophobia are the homophobes.

    Having someone express the view they don't agree with gay marriage is homophobia??

    Jesus Christ!!!
    That term is so diluted and misused now, it's almost meaningless.


  • Options
    #49
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,843 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Having someone express the view they don't agree with gay marriage is homophobia??

    Jesus Christ!!!
    That term is so diluted and misused now, it's almost meaningless.

    Well, I suppose your kind are trying anything to make yourselves feel better. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #50
    arayess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭arayess


    FairytaleGirl wrote: »
    But if I were to pass it would mean taking a huge step backwards for equality. It's cake now, it could be refusing me and my girlfriend a double room (or a room at all) in a hotel next week, or refusing to lease us a one bedroom apartment next month
    Etc etc


    my neighbour is an old woman who has bedsits and refuses to let to unmarried couples.
    It has never caused a row people just move on.

    Taking her to court would be a travesty fo justice , she wants a certain (misguided imo ) level of decorum in her establishment (paid for by her earnings) I really don't see why people are going bananas over stuff like this.

    People getting upset over others not approving of this lifestyle is sensitive in the extreme .
    Yes you shouldn't abused over it or discriminated by state services.
    But if a shop doesn't want to make gay slogans so be it, go to the next one.

    Why this forcing of acceptance on people and not just leave them to it which is want I always understood gay people wanted anyway - to be left carry on living their lives. Why the desire to enforce that on people who would rather not get involved and want to be left alone.


  • Options
    #51
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,671 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Daith wrote: »
    Hold on. The law they are talking about is a new law so you would be permitted to not to do business based on the sexuality of the customer. Not just slogans. That doesn't seem bad?


    No, that's not what the law is about at all. The 'conscience clause' being proposed is that nobody should be made to conduct their business in a manner in which they have an objection to, based on their religious beliefs. That's a good thing for some people, and a bad thing for other people. It just depends upon which side of the fence you're on.

    Personally I don't see any compelling reason to force a business owner to act in a manner which contravenes their religious beliefs, it's got nothing to do with equality, and more to do with how businesses which provide a service to the public are regulated.

    If a business refuses to offer their services to a person for any reason, that's an inconvenience to the person, granted, but there are many other service providers willing to provide their services to that person. The equality laws should only apply to employers and employees IMO, and who they choose to provide their services to should be their own business.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Having someone express the view they don't agree with gay marriage is homophobia??

    Having someone express the view they don't agree with interracial marriage is racist??
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Personally I don't see any compelling reason to force a business owner to act in a manner which contravenes their religious beliefs, it's got nothing to do with equality, and more to do with how businesses which provide a service to the public are regulated.

    Rubbish. Why should a religious belief over rule the law of a country?


  • Options
    #53
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Daith wrote: »
    Once again, the only victims of homophobia are the homophobes.


    Are you calling me homophobic? I was under the impression that homosexuals were the victims of homophobia...I suffer neither hate for, nor fear of, homosexuals.

    Interesting to see how quick you are to throw that word around. Another tool/tactic?


  • Options
    #54
    FairytaleGirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 663 ✭✭✭FairytaleGirl


    arayess wrote: »
    my neighbour is an old woman who has bedsits and refuses to let to unmarried couples.
    It has never caused a row people just move on.

    Taking her to court would be a travesty fo justice , she wants a certain (misguided imo ) level of decorum in her establishment (paid for by her earnings) I really don't see why people are going bananas over stuff like this.

    People getting upset over others not approving of this lifestyle is sensitive in the extreme .
    Yes you shouldn't abused over it or discriminated by state services.
    But if a shop doesn't want to make gay slogans so be it, go to the next one.

    Why this forcing of acceptance on people and not just leave them to it which is want I always understood gay people wanted anyway - to be left carry on living their lives. Why the deserve to enforce that on people who would rather not get involved and want to be left alone.

    Would you have the same belief if it was towards mixed race couples? A white woman/black man?
    Because at the end of the day it's treating people as lesser because of something (their relationship) that's really no one else's business.


  • Options
    #55
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Are you calling me homophobic?

    Nope but feel free to jump to conclusions again.
    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Interesting to see how quick you are to throw that word around. Another tool/tactic?

    I used that word once. You've used it more than me.

    I actually think the bakery shouldn't have to had put the slogan on a cake. I don't support the new bill though.


  • Options
    #56
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Daith wrote: »
    Nope but feel free to jump to conclusions again.

    I guess I must have been mistaken then. When someone replies to a post of mine by referencing homophobia and homophobics, there is no insinuation. No underhanded, immature, cowardly tactics.
    Maybe choose your words more carefully?*


    * as if you didn't.


  • Options
    #57
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    I guess I must have been mistaken then.

    Yes! Thanks.
    lazybones32 wrote: »
    Maybe choose your words more carefully?*

    I'll use the word homophobia if I want to? Again, wasn't calling you a homophobe. Or anyone. It was a general statement just to be clear.


  • Options
    #58
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    I don't think hyperbole is helping the argument.

    Reading the article, it says "The Equality Commission has brought a civil case against Ashers Baking Company after it refused to bake a cake with a pro-gay marriage slogan.".

    I don't really see the issue here. The business was not refusing to serve a gay customer because the customer is gay - they were refusing to print a slogan on their product that is contrary to their own belief.
    If they can be blamed for this, a Republican Northern Irish baker should also be blamed for refusing to print "Long life to British Ireland" on a cake.

    The thing is blown out of proportion because the gay and religious lobbies are thrown into the mix and have both decided to get some publicity out if this.


  • Options
    #59
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Lols if someone uses said clause to not serve the Irish.


  • Options
    #60
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    Bob24 wrote: »
    The thing is blown out of proportion because the gay and religious lobbies are thrown into the mix and have both decided to get some publicity out if this.

    On both parts I think.

    As I said, I don't think the bakery should have been in trouble for not printing the slogan.

    However I don't think the answer is a religious freedom of choice bill.

    The issue is with the slogan not gay people or religious people. It could have been any slogan or message.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,671 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Daith wrote: »
    Rubbish. Why should a religious belief over rule the law of a country?


    It's not over-ruling any law? Religion is one of the nine grounds on which a person cannot be discriminated against, and that's why there is a suggestion of a 'hierarchy of discrimination' where a business would be forced to act in a way which contravenes it's business owners religious beliefs.

    Would you like it if you were a business owner who was forced to act in a manner which contravenes you moral and ethical standards? I certainly wouldn't.

    To give you an example - I'm self-employed, I provide my services to people as I see fit, I can deny my services to people for any reason I see fit and I've never had anyone try to take me to court for it. I have refused business before from people for numerous reasons which didn't fit in with my moral and ethical standards.

    The law in NI as it currently stands means that I would be forced to provide my services to someone I had a moral or ethical objection to provide my services for. It's effectively telling me that I cannot choose who I shall work for, and if a legal challenge were to arise from me refusing to provide my services to anyone for any reason, I'd shut up shop in the morning because I would no longer have that essential element of control over my own business.


Advertisement