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

Gay Cake Controversy!

16791112129

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,711 ✭✭✭keano_afc


    I dont think there's anything to see here to be honest. They are perfectly entitled to turn business away if they see fit.

    What is interesting is the tactical decision of the consumer to specifically choose that bakery for their cake.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    keano_afc wrote: »
    I dont think there's anything to see here to be honest. They are perfectly entitled to turn business away if they see fit.

    What is interesting is the tactical decision of the consumer to specifically choose that bakery for their cake.

    Perhaps they should go abroad?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Hello fellow members of the LGBT-thread swat team.


    The fairly clear baiting of a business to make a political point is a dick move. As is refusing to make a cake on ideological grounds. The people involved deserve each other, and ironically they are dicks all round.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    floggg wrote: »
    "We don't offer jobs to women. We don't agree with women working."

    Yeah, that would be illegal.

    I'm not proposing withholding services to anyone based on who/what they are. I'm saying that a business should be able to withhold services for certain jobs they don't agree with.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    Hello fellow members of the LGBT-thread swat team.


    The fairly clear baiting of a business to make a political point is a dick move. As is refusing to make a cake on ideological grounds. The people involved deserve each other, and ironically they are dicks all round.

    Bigger dicks are the people threatening legal action on a business as a ploy to get sympathy for their cause and trying to damage the livelihoods of people who disagree with them, to be fair.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,537 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    No it's not.

    They should not be allowed to say: "I'm not serving you, you're gay!"

    They should be allowed to say: "Sorry, we don't do civil partnership cakes. We don't agree with them" to anyone.

    Thats effectively the same thing :cool:

    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



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,636 ✭✭✭feargale


    Not a big fan of cake myself, prefer buns.

    Fairy cakes?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Bigger dicks are the people threatening legal action on a business as a ploy to get sympathy for their cause and trying to damage the livelihoods of people who disagree with them, to be fair.

    Nah. They should highlight every instance, every single example of intolerance & those seeking to deny the basic rights of people getting married. Which is what every single person who is opposed to SSM is doing. Directly or indirectly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,711 ✭✭✭keano_afc


    old hippy wrote: »
    Perhaps they should go abroad?

    Or you know, a shop that would make the cake without having to conflict with their beliefs. But there's no publicity in that is there?


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,319 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nah. They should highlight every instance, every single example of intolerance & those seeking to deny the basic rights of people getting married. Which is what every single person who is opposed to SSM is doing. Directly or indirectly.

    Is it OK for married people then?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,489 ✭✭✭dissed doc


    floggg wrote: »
    You don't understand the legislation you are criticising.

    Jewish butchers are subject to the legislation in question but it wouldn't require the Jewish Butcher to sell pork. It would require a Jewish butcher to sell kosher meats to Christians, Muslims, gays and women etc.

    so the devout jewish butcher can refuse to sell pork for religious reasons.

    the devout muslim refuses to sell alcohol or handle pork can do that for relgious reasons (e.g. M&S in the UK)

    the devout christian refuses to sell a cake of a particular type for religious reasons - and this is wrong how?

    real doublethink going on here with some people. free and tolerant and enjoying halal meat, but under no circumstances can someone confrony the hypocrisy of the liberal intolerance of being liberal.

    live and let live, find a baker that matches your belief system. liberals are the worst bigots.

    So no, it's not similar.

    Anybody giving the Jewish butcher selling pork analogy is incorrect and should go have a look around the equality authority's websites as well as the legislation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Bigger dicks are the people threatening legal action on a business as a ploy to get sympathy for their cause and trying to damage the livelihoods of people who disagree with them, to be fair.


    The decision not to make the cake went to company head office to be mulled over before being refused. And then they went on to release a video about their decision. Both sides are trying to get sympathy for their cause and damaging people's lives. Everyone needs to stop waving the victim card, these idiots are spoiling for a fight. **** them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,400 ✭✭✭Medusa22


    Hello fellow members of the LGBT-thread swat team.


    The fairly clear baiting of a business to make a political point is a dick move. As is refusing to make a cake on ideological grounds. The people involved deserve each other, and ironically they are dicks all round.

    It is possible that the business was baited and if it was then I agree that it is a dick move, but what if it wasn't? I wasn't aware that the name of the bakery is a reference to a Jewish tribe in the bible, perhaps that makes me ignorant but I am quite sure I'm not the only one.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nah. They should highlight every instance, every single example of intolerance & those seeking to deny the basic rights of people getting married. Which is what every single person who is opposed to SSM is doing. Directly or indirectly.

    The cake buyers are doing a good job highlighting their own intolerance to be fair to them. "You must do what I demand of you because I'm gay and if you don't you're denying me my right to get married."

    Pull the other one - it's got chocolate sprinkles on it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,342 ✭✭✭fatknacker


    I don't think I can agree with this sort of bullying tactics by some LGBT activists as their campaign has gone from strength to strength recently. It's clear many people, particularly young people all over social media are behind gay marriage, but the deliberate targeting of a small business who isn't is a bit lame and unnecessary. Surely there are bigger fish (or loaves....hey!) to fry than a religious cake shop.

    Regardless if they take the body of Christ on their tongue or not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    The decision not to make the cake went to company head office to be mulled over before being refused. And then they went on to release a video about their decision.

    ....more than six weeks later, after a legal letter from the Equality Authority. Yes.
    Everyone needs to stop waving the victim card, these idiots are spoiling for a fight. **** them.

    I doubt the bakery was looking for this fight.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Medusa22 wrote: »
    It is possible that the business was baited and if it was then I agree that it is a dick move, but what if it wasn't? I wasn't aware that the name of the bakery is a reference to a Jewish tribe in the bible, perhaps that makes me ignorant but I am quite sure I'm not the only one.


    I don't buy it that the whole thing wasn't planned.

    But if it wasn't, I personally would be glad to get the heads-up the the people I was about to give my money to were assholes, and gone elsewhere.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,984 ✭✭✭mikeym


    I wonder what the DUP think?

    Their members love the LGBT community.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper




    I doubt the bakery was looking for this fight.

    Then they should have just shut up and made a cake with muppets on it.


  • Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ Lexie Incalculable Wimp


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nah. They should highlight every instance, every single example of intolerance & those seeking to deny the basic rights of people getting married. Which is what every single person who is opposed to SSM is doing. Directly or indirectly.

    So basically if someone shares a different viewpoint to you then they should be called on it and publicly shamed? That's a real nice attitude you have.

    The bakery in question here did not deny anyone the right to get married, they simply do not agree with it and as such did not want to associate their business with it. They are perfectly entitled to do so. I'm all for equal rights for all but there is no need for the bullying tactics being used in this instance.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,744 ✭✭✭diomed


    I don't know where I stand on political cake messages but I like these
    http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/photos/25-hilarious-cake-messages


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,271 ✭✭✭TireeTerror


    I think any business should have the right to chose who they buy and sell to without having to explain their reasons to anyone. If they decided to explain a reason for refusal of providing a service and people found it to be offensive for whatever reason, tough luck. Nothing stopping people going to buy a cake elsewhere. Nobody should be forced to provide a service for anything.

    I understand that gays might be offended by feeling discriminated against,. but on the exact same note the bakery owners should be quite within their rights to be offended by gay marriage or any other thing they choose, whether it be refusing service to anyone for any reason. It is their business and their own thoughts, whether socially acceptable or not, and they must also be recognised. If I want to be racist and never talk to a black person ever again, thats my choosing and I do not see how anybody has any right to force me what to do based upon their values.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    keano_afc wrote: »
    Or you know, a shop that would make the cake without having to conflict with their beliefs. But there's no publicity in that is there?

    No there isn't. That's the whole point.
    Is it OK for married people then?

    :confused:
    The cake buyers are doing a good job highlighting their own intolerance to be fair to them. "You must do what I demand of you because I'm gay and if you don't you're denying me my right to get married."

    Pull the other one - it's got chocolate sprinkles on it.

    Ah yes, the intolerant gays - oppressing the straight folks as they have done since the dawn of time.


  • Posts: 15,814 ✭✭✭✭ Lexie Incalculable Wimp


    Thinking about this and I wonder if had the cake been made would there have been a case to be made for copyright infringement? After all the customer want a cake created which infringed the intellectual property rights, including copyrights, trademark rights, and personality rights of another person or company.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,274 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Bigger dicks are the people threatening legal action on a business as a ploy to get sympathy for their cause and trying to damage the livelihoods of people who disagree with them, to be fair.

    In fairness they are perfectly entitled to highlight the discrimination in my view. The shop owners obviously value their policy, so what have they to be embarassed about?

    I'd agree to an extent that they can refuse to make the cake, just don't go crying when somebody points out your discriminatory policy. With freedom of speech and religion comes responsibility and sometimes costly consequences.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    So basically if someone shares a different viewpoint to you then they should be called on it and publicly shamed? That's a real nice attitude you have.

    The bakery in question here did not deny anyone the right to get married, they simply do not agree with it and as such did not want to associate their business with it. They are perfectly entitled to do so. I'm all for equal rights for all but there is no need for the bullying tactics being used in this instance.

    Nobody is bullying anyone. But yes, people should be named & shamed. Picket the place if needs be.

    Sometimes to bring about change, you have to up the game.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    old hippy wrote: »
    Sometimes to bring about changemake sure people agree with you, you have to up the gamethreaten their livelihoods.

    FYP


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,271 ✭✭✭TireeTerror


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nobody is bullying anyone. But yes, people should be named & shamed. Picket the place if needs be.

    Sometimes to bring about change, you have to up the game.

    What a load of garbage. A business as well as individuals have just as much right to be against something as you have for something. By trying to force people to change their ways is wrong and as a result you would find that people would simply dig their heels in.

    If anyone tried to force me to change my opinion on something by picketing me or anything like that, they would soon regret it as I would lose the head and use brute force. Your suggestion is nothing but bullying and I hate bullies.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nobody is bullying anyone. But yes, people should be named & shamed. Picket the place if needs be.

    Sometimes to bring about change, you have to up the game.


    Picketing would be bullying, and a hilarious overreaction which would sap credibility from more serious issues.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,319 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    old hippy wrote: »
    Nobody is bullying anyone. But yes, people should be named & shamed. Picket the place if needs be.

    Sometimes to bring about change, you have to up the game.

    They will need to up it a bit more than just getting some compensation from a shop. If that is what happens. They still have to convince the parliament of the country to enact the legislation they want. Something which has been rejected three times. The first step would be to put up candidates in every constituency in the next NI assembly election to seek a mandate for their cause.


Advertisement