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

Firm refuses to print invites to gay wedding for second time

Options
245678

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    And the cake?


  • Options
    #33
    Orion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    duffman3833 wrote: »
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/firm-refuses-to-print-invites-to-gay-wedding-for-second-time-35145587.html

    i have nothing against same sex couples but im backing the shop owners in their decision. There are a lot of very religious people out there still and if they don't want to accept the business due to their beliefs then that's OK too.
    Is the women been attention seeking as a lot of people mentioned in the indo comments or were the business owners wrong to refuse her.
    In today's world we are expected to accept pretty much everything, change is happening and people need to accept it, but not all people want to

    You can support them all you like but at the end of the day it's illegal under the Equal Status Act and they should be prosecuted for it.


  • Options
    #34
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    We don't need a law to force him to deal with people that go against his deeply held political or religious beliefs.

    Just another thought:
    What if everyone else (and I mean everyone else) in Drogheda decides that it's their deeply held political and religious belief not to serve this guy, because of his deeply held political and religious beliefs. Customers, all the food shops, delis and fast food places, even his own business suppliers stop dealing with him. Would that be ok? What if that meant he had to move somewhere else, to find people who would deal him, would that be ok?
    What if he couldn't afford to move, would it still be ok?


  • Options
    #35
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    And the cake?

    I don't know who or what the Ashers are. Can you answer the rest of my posts?


  • Options
    #36
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,344 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Just another thought:
    What if everyone else (and I mean everyone else) in Drogheda decides that it's their deeply held political and religious belief not to serve this guy, because of his deeply held political and religious beliefs. Customers, all the food shops, delis and fast food places, even his own business suppliers stop dealing with him. Would that be ok? What if that meant he had to move somewhere else, to find people who would deal him, would that be ok?
    What if he couldn't afford to move, would it still be ok?


    I know plenty of businesses that won't serve certain people. Some for no apparent reason (the obvious being nightclubs, pubs).


    The last lads went out mouthing left right and centre. As a 'gesture of goodwill' almost every service provider in the town wanted to be the big man, and be seen to be supporting the little people (ie, looking for Facebook likes).

    So as far as I am aware, they practically had a free wedding as all the service providers 'donated' their services to the worthy cause of standing up for the gay couple that were turned away.

    I presume the lesbians want similar. Or just want their faces in the paper.


    I live near that place, and although I've nothing against gay people, i also have nothing against religious people. It is an outwardly, blatantly obviously religiously run printing place. Why you would deliberately go there with a gay invite, especially after the high profile story before, is only if you were looking for attention.


    or at least, all in my opinion anyway. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,933 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    I'm defending their right to run their business as they see fit, most print shops would print them just for profit, this business has a religious belief that goes against their faith.
    What your suggesting is bringing in a law to force them to conform. That's a massive step backwards.
    I'm more pro freedom of choice than equality.
    The girls are free to have their wedding and the printer is free to print what he likes and doesn't like, that's a free society, I'd take that over a future of your perception of equality any day.

    A business cant have a belief. Its a personal belief.

    The problem is that if we allow discrimination to become normalised then it can become pervasive and the freedoms you speak of can be talen away on a largescale basis. We have seen this before; in America where black people clearly had vry few freedoms in society, in Ireland where married women could be raped and couldnt work in certain professions, so to suggest anti discrimination/equality law upholds freedom is not correct at all. In fact removing it attacks the freedom of people under the 10 grounds to access goods or services and to be employed.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #38
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,933 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    If it was state run then no, this is private so I believe it's up to the owner, it's his business and he should be able to choose who he does business with on his time in his premises. If you don't like how he runs his business then don't go there.
    We don't need a law to force him to deal with people that go against his deeply held political or religious beliefs.
    If the Gay cake controversy was Martin McGuinness trying to force Ashers to make a tiocfaidh ar la cake who are a norther protestant family(i think there not can't remember the exact religion) and they refused, what's your opinion?
    This isn't something you can fix with an equality law it's about giving people freedom of choice.
    We should be reinforcing laws about choice not creating ones based on equality but not fairness or reason.

    Private businesses are subject to laws in soooooooo many different ways; finance, health and safety, taxation etc etc etc. In setting up a business a person does that in that context. Why do you want a free for all system where people are not free to choose which goods and services they can access because they are being discriminated against?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #39
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    And the cake?

    I don't know who or what the Ashers are. Can you answer the rest of my posts?
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    And the cake?

    I don't know who or what the Ashers are. Can you answer the rest of my posts?

    Look up the ashers thread here on boards all your answered are in there.


  • Options
    #40
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    A business cant have a belief. Its a personal belief.

    The problem is that if we allow discrimination to become normalised then it can become pervasive and the freedoms you speak of can be talen away on a largescale basis. We have seen this before; in America where black people clearly had vry few freedoms in society, in Ireland where married women could be raped and couldnt work in certain professions, so to suggest anti discrimination/equality law upholds freedom is not correct at all. In fact removing it attacks the freedom of people under the 10 grounds to access goods or services and to be employed.

    A business owner can have a belief which is expressed in how he/she conducts their business.
    As far as I'm aware, freedom of religion is still guaranteed under our constitution. His stance is the outworking of his religious belief.
    Only solution is to have a referendum to change the constitution and ban religion of any type. We're not far off it as far as I can see.
    So much for equality!

    Looks more to me like animal farm, everyone is equal but some more equal than others ( or to put it another way.... You're equal if you agree with me)


  • Options
    #41
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    If it was state run then no, this is private so I believe it's up to the owner, it's his business and he should be able to choose who he does business with on his time in his premises. If you don't like how he runs his business then don't go there.
    We don't need a law to force him to deal with people that go against his deeply held political or religious beliefs.
    If the Gay cake controversy was Martin McGuinness trying to force Ashers to make a tiocfaidh ar la cake who are a norther protestant family(i think there not can't remember the exact religion) and they refused, what's your opinion?
    This isn't something you can fix with an equality law it's about giving people freedom of choice.
    We should be reinforcing laws about choice not creating ones based on equality but not fairness or reason.

    Private businesses are subject to laws in soooooooo many different ways; finance, health and safety, taxation etc etc etc. In setting up a business a person does that in that context. Why do you want a free for all system where people are not free to choose which goods and services they can access because they are being discriminated against?

    There's no way to make everyone happy in this scenario, a law won't make it any simpler it will just jack up prices, any law would need to discriminate against one of the parties.
    From one of the posters above it sounds obivious what the girl was up to.
    Think I said it before Joey it takes two to tango but only one can lead the dance that's why I'm pro choice in this scenario as I can't see how equality fixes anything here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »
    LOL, they choose that shop deliberately. Everyone out this way and most of the country knows about the previous incident where the shop wouldn't print invites for a gay wedding.

    It's most likely trouble makers trying to kick off again at the same place.

    Yes. There are a group of nasty people out there who make a point of seeking out these businesses to make a political point.


  • Options
    #43
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,933 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Alaric Tall Wrestler wrote: »
    A business owner can have a belief which is expressed in how he/she conducts their business.
    As far as I'm aware, freedom of religion is still guaranteed under our constitution. His stance is the outworking of his religious belief.
    Only solution is to have a referendum to change the constitution and ban religion of any type. We're not far off it as far as I can see.
    So much for equality!

    Looks more to me like animal farm, everyone is equal but some more equal than others ( or to put it another way.... You're equal if you agree with me)

    It's a balancing of rights. LGBT people have the right to be free from discrimination while religious people have the right to hold their beliefs. The problem is when these rights collide. The law in Ireland and in many other countries does go down the route of protecting minorties against discrimination. And rightly so in my opinion. I'm glad the Irish state steps in and values and protects the human rights of lgbti people and the other 8 grounds.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #44
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,933 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    There's no way to make everyone happy in this scenario, a law won't make it any simpler it will just jack up prices, any law would need to discriminate against one of the parties.
    From one of the posters above it sounds obivious what the girl was up to.
    Think I said it before Joey it takes two to tango but only one can lead the dance that's why I'm pro choice in this scenario as I can't see how equality fixes anything here.

    Pro choice is hardly the correct description more pro discrimination

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #45
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    They both have other choices, what's been suggested is bring in law to give no choice to one side. That I'm against.


  • Options
    #46
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    It's a balancing of rights. LGBT people have the right to be free from discrimination while religious people have the right to hold their beliefs. The problem is when these rights collide. The law in Ireland and in many other countries does go down the route of protecting minorties against discrimination. And rightly so in my opinion. I'm glad the Irish state steps in and values and protects the human rights of lgbti people and the other 8 grounds.
    So as I said. Let's discriminate against one side and step on their conditional rights.
    The people in question it seems would have known the shops stance and still pushed their buttons. I'm with the shop.


  • Options
    #47
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,933 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    They both have other choices, what's been suggested is bring in law to give no choice to one side. That I'm against.

    They have no choice in providing a safe and healthy work environment, they have no choice on registering with the company registration office, they have no choice but to pay taxes, there are lots of things that businesses have no choice on.

    You havent addressed what happens when a person has no choice because every business discriminates

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #48
    HighF123
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭HighF123


    This printing business had been in the news last when it did the same thing to another gay couple. I wonder was the lady aware of this?


  • Options
    #49
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,899 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    They both have other choices, what's been suggested is bring in law to give no choice to one side. That I'm against.

    Where do you draw the line at "they have other choices"?

    If there was only one printer willing to print them and the rest not, is that still acceptable? What if that printer changes its mind?

    What if a printer says they refuse to print for mixed-race marriages, as many religions have issues with those? Is it still an acceptable choice then?

    If you go in to business in Ireland you know the regulations. You don't choices to break them.


  • Options
    #50
    Holograph
    Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭Holograph


    Orion wrote: »
    You can support them all you like but at the end of the day it's illegal under the Equal Status Act and they should be prosecuted for it.
    Being devil's advocate here (and that is the extent of my legal expertise :p): is it though? I mean, if a same-sex couple walked into their premises holding hands and were met with "Please leave, gay people are not allowed in here" or "We do not accept business from homosexuals" (before any specifics were requested) or "We do not accept business from homosexuals" after they asked for business cards for their e.g. web design company, you would be right I assume... But is "We are not in a position to do this as homosexuality is against our religion", when asked to print invitations to a same-sex wedding, the same thing?


  • Options
    #51
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,899 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Holograph wrote: »
    Being devil's advocate here (and that is the extent of my legal expertise :p): is it though? I mean, if a same-sex couple walked into their premises holding hands and were met with "Please leave, gay people are not allowed in here" or "We do not accept business from homosexuals" (before any specifics were requested) or "We do not accept business from homosexuals" after they asked for business cards for their e.g. web design company, you would be right I assume... But is "We are not in a position to do this as homosexuality is against our religion", when asked to print invitations to a same-sex wedding, the same thing?

    Both cases are refusal of service due to the sexual orientation of the customer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Holograph
    Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭Holograph


    L1011 wrote: »
    Both cases are refusal of service due to the sexual orientation of the customer.
    Maybe it is semantics but to me it seems "I cannot do that as it's against my religion" is the key angle - i.e. on the grounds of religious freedom/same-sex marriage by itself rather than them being gay? If that response was then met by (unlikely I know) "Ok, well we would like business cards for our web design company instead" and THAT was met by "No can do, you're gay" then yes, certainly it seems cut and dry discrimination.


  • Options
    #53
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    L1011 wrote: »
    Both cases are refusal of service due to the sexual orientation of the customer.

    Nothing to do with the customer. If a straight person went in on their behalf presumably they would give the same response.


  • Options
    #54
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,899 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    oik wrote: »
    Nothing to do with the customer. If a straight person went in on their behalf presumably they would give the same response.

    Can guarantee such hair splitting doesn't matter a damm legally - the legislation was written knowing people would try it. And they do - the UK B&B case for instance. UK legislation is vaguely based on ours as we did it earlier


  • Options
    #55
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    If they've said it's because of religious belief and have not said because you're homosexual, then I can't see any discrimination.
    They could equally refused posters for a boxing match based on the new testament aversion to violence.


  • Options
    #56
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,899 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Alaric Tall Wrestler wrote: »
    If they've said it's because of religious belief and have not said because you're homosexual, then I can't see any discrimination.
    They could equally refused posters for a boxing match based on the new testament aversion to violence.

    Boxing matches are not protected under the equal status legislation.

    You can't give reasons to make breaking that OK.


  • Options
    #57
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    The business did nothing wrong here. I've nothing against homosexuals, and if they want to call their partnership a marriage, then that's fine by me. But the customer could have ordered anything other than that specific item and it wouldn't have been an issue. I don't want future generations growing up in a society where you are forced under pain of prosecution to subscribe to one particular set of beliefs. It would make us no better than Islamic State.


  • Options
    #58
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,899 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    frostyjacks wrote: »
    The business did nothing wrong here. I've nothing against homosexuals, and if they want to call their partnership a marriage, then that's fine by me. But the customer could have ordered anything other than that specific item and it wouldn't have been an issue. I don't want future generations growing up in a society where you are forced under pain of prosecution to subscribe to one particular set of beliefs. It would make us no better than Islamic State.

    The state, via the constitution as amended by the people call the partnership a marriage, because it is one.

    You have lived in a society which prevents you from discriminating against homosexuals for almost 20 years - but pressing print on a printer is not subscribing to a set of beliefs


  • Options
    #59
    GreenFolder2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭GreenFolder2


    Alaric Tall Wrestler wrote: »
    If they've said it's because of religious belief and have not said because you're homosexual, then I can't see any discrimination.
    They could equally refused posters for a boxing match based on the new testament aversion to violence.

    It's actually not comparable as being gay is a personal attribute, much like being blue-eyed or dark-skinned. It's utterly intrinsic to that person.

    You might as well go back to the days of people putting up "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" signs if you accept this kind of thing. It is just unacceptable in a civilised society that accepts people are gay and that supports gay marriage, including at constitutional level, where it was validated by a pretty serious majority of the population too. So, it's far from some kind of technicality.

    In fact, one could argue this is not only covered by the Equal Status Act but also the state is compelled to act under Article 41 of the constitution:

    41.3.1° "The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

    Bear in mind that the Irish Constitution defines marriage to include same-sex marriage, so all rights and protections are fully extended.

    If you want to operate a business and trade, there are rules that include things like paying tax, complying with all sorts of legislation around health and safety, environmental laws etc etc and also not discriminating against classes of customers as per the Equal Status Act.

    I mean what if someone were to say that it was their religious belief that they would not comply with any one of any other of a raft of legislation that apply to business? They'd be getting absolutely no where.

    You cannot have a situation where someone's religious beliefs trump the law, particularly when it comes to business.


  • Options
    #60
    solodeogloria
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,739 ✭✭✭solodeogloria


    Good morning!

    Thank you for your post OP.

    I've posted a thread on the Christianity forum for a discussion on this amongst Christians.

    I personally disagree with the printer and I'm a conservative Christian who holds to traditional marriage. I have changed my view in this recently but I think as a secular business they shouldn't have the right to refuse this service.

    Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
    solodeogloria


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    GreenFolder2 wrote: »
    It's actually not comparable as being gay is a personal attribute, much like being blue-eyed or dark-skinned. It's utterly intrinsic to that person.

    You might as well go back to the days of people putting up "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" signs if you accept this kind of thing. It is just unacceptable in a civilised society that accepts people are gay and that supports gay marriage, including at constitutional level, where it was validated by a pretty serious majority of the population too. So, it's far from some kind of technicality.

    In fact, one could argue this is not only covered by the Equal Status Act but also the state is compelled to act under Article 41 of the constitution:

    41.3.1° "The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

    Bear in mind that the Irish Constitution defines marriage to include same-sex marriage, so all rights and protections are fully extended.

    If you want to operate a business and trade, there are rules that include things like paying tax, complying with all sorts of legislation around health and safety, environmental laws etc etc and also not discriminating against classes of customers as per the Equal Status Act.

    I mean what if someone were to say that it was their religious belief that they would not comply with any one of any other of a raft of legislation that apply to business? They'd be getting absolutely no where.

    You cannot have a situation where someone's religious beliefs trump the law, particularly when it comes to business.

    The printer didn't attack gay marriage. He's minding his own business, offending no one, when someone seeks him out and asks him to do something knowing full well he doesn't want to do it. I wouldn't expect a Jewish printer to reel off posters denying the holocaust, no matter what price he was offered.


Advertisement