Gay Cake Controversy!

dissed doc · 08-07-2014 3:17pm

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.

bodice ripper · 08-07-2014 3:17pm

I Heart Internet wrote: »

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.

Medusa22 · 08-07-2014 3:18pm

bodice ripper wrote: »

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.

I Heart Internet · 08-07-2014 3:18pm

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.

fatknacker · 08-07-2014 3:20pm

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.

I Heart Internet · 08-07-2014 3:21pm

bodice ripper wrote: »

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.

bodice ripper wrote: »

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.

bodice ripper · 08-07-2014 3:22pm

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.

mikeym · 08-07-2014 3:23pm

I wonder what the DUP think?

Their members love the LGBT community.

bodice ripper · 08-07-2014 3:23pm

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I doubt the bakery was looking for this fight.

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

08-07-2014 3:24pm

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.

diomed · 08-07-2014 3:24pm

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

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:25pm

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.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 3:26pm

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.

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Is it OK for married people then?

I Heart Internet wrote: »

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.

08-07-2014 3:28pm

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.

K-9 · 08-07-2014 3:34pm

I Heart Internet wrote: »

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.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 3:36pm

Deleted User wrote: »

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.

I Heart Internet · 08-07-2014 3:38pm

old hippy wrote: »

Sometimes to bring about changemake sure people agree with you, you have to up the gamethreaten their livelihoods.

FYP

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:39pm

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.

bodice ripper · 08-07-2014 3:40pm

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.

dxhound2005 · 08-07-2014 3:40pm

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.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 3:42pm

I Heart Internet wrote: »

FYP

Did you know your username is an anagram of Threaten tinier?

Since we're being trite and trivial now.

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:43pm

All this drivel by gay supporters and their stupid attention seeking campaigns actually just turns many people against them.

I do not care that much if someone is gay, I have a few friends who are gay, but I would not have two men sitting at a party in my house kissing each other. I do not want to see those kind of things and I would ask them to stop or to leave. I am not old fashioned, I just do not like to see it. I cannot help that feeling, it just makes me uncomfortable, if it was two girls kissing, well that would be different altogether!

Grayson · 08-07-2014 3:44pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

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.

And yet using "brute force" is fine?

You know, there are so many contradictory statements in your post, I'm just going to leave it at that.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 3:45pm

dxhound2005 wrote: »

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.

In the long term, maybe. But marriage is a basic human right, why seek a mandate for their cause, as you put it? Just do it.

In the meantime, tactics like these might upset the everyday timid and retiring Joes but it makes headlines and attracts attention to the cause.

You may not like it but then, who is denying your right to get married or even be served in a shop?

folan · 08-07-2014 3:45pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

I do not care that much if someone is gay..... I do not want to see those kind of things and I would ask them to stop or to leave..... I just do not like to see it.......it just makes me uncomfortable

yes you do.

folan · 08-07-2014 3:46pm

if we allow cakes to marry, what next?

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:47pm

Grayson wrote: »

And yet using "brute force" is fine?

You know, there are so many contradictory statements in your post, I'm just going to leave it at that.

I would meet their picketing and bullying by using physical force to remove them. I would not tolerate people trying to intimidate me. There is a difference if I am reacting to actions, rather than going out of my way to cause trouble.

08-07-2014 3:47pm

I'm sort of conflicted about this. I don't think the bakery should be prosecuted or forced against their will to make the cake. I'm glad however that they've been named and shamed so that people can decide not to give their custom to a place run by people with such backward views.

I don't think they should be brought to court over this but I would have zero sympathy if their business took a nosedive after this. I'd certainly boycott the place if it was local.

bodice ripper wrote: »

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 kind of a dick move in fairness. But if I was a regular customer of Asher's then it's a dick move I'm glad happened so that I'd know to avoid the place in the future.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 3:48pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

All this drivel by gay supporters and their stupid attention seeking campaigns actually just turns many people against them.

I do not care that much if someone is gay, I have a few friends who are gay, but I would not have two men sitting at a party in my house kissing each other. I do not want to see those kind of things and I would ask them to stop or to leave. I am not old fashioned, I just do not like to see it. I cannot help that feeling, it just makes me uncomfortable, if it was two girls kissing, well that would be different altogether!

Before people get upset about that post; it's obviously a satirical swipe at those who oppose gay marriage/relationships

dxhound2005 · 08-07-2014 3:49pm

old hippy wrote: »

In the long term, maybe. But marriage is a basic human right, why seek a mandate for their cause, as you put it? Just do it.

In the meantime, tactics like these might upset the everyday timid and retiring Joes but it makes headlines and attracts attention to the cause.

You may not like it but then, who is denying your right to get married or even be served in a shop?

You are completely ignoring the decisions of the elected parliament. They voted three times on Sinn Fein proposals to introduce SSM in the North and the majority was against on each occasion.

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:50pm

folan wrote: »

yes you do.

As I said I have a few friends who are gay and their sexuality is never even in the topic of conversation, but if its right in my face, then yes, I don't like it.

Most gays I have met are aware it can cause discomfort in others and they maybe restrain themselves a little. Which in itself is not right at all, but thats how it is. I know we are progressing and it is more and more acceptable, but things require time to change.

I do not hate gays, or anything ridiculous like that, I just do not like to see two men kissing, it gives me the boke!

folan · 08-07-2014 3:52pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

As I said I have a few friends who are gay and their sexuality is never even in the topic of conversation, but if its right in my face, then yes, I don't like it.

Most gays I have met are aware it can cause discomfort in others and they maybe restrain themselves a little. Which in itself is not right at all, but thats how it is. I know we are progressing and it is more and more acceptable, but things require time to change.

I do not hate gays, or anything ridiculous like that, I just do not like to see two men kissing, it gives me the boke!

im glad you have gay friends. i hope you continue to impose your discomfort upon them. at least you know its not right though, that makes it fine.

TireeTerror · 08-07-2014 3:58pm

folan wrote: »

im glad you have gay friends. i hope you continue to impose your discomfort upon them. at least you know its not right though, that makes it fine.

I have not been in that situation where I have had to remain in close confines of two men kissing. Where it has occurred its been simple enough for me to avoid. If it did happen at a party at my house, then I would sit and deliberate with myself because I wouldnt want to make it obvious I didn't like it, for a few reasons. I wouldnt want to come across as intolerant, I wouldn't want to offend or embarrass them or anyone else there, and I would also be a bit ashamed of feeling uncomfortable in the first place. That does not change the fact that I know I do not like it and if there is something I do not like that much I think I would need to say something.

Annasopra · 08-07-2014 3:58pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

As I said I have a few friends who are gay and their sexuality is never even in the topic of conversation, but if its right in my face, then yes, I don't like it.

Most gays I have met are aware it can cause discomfort in others and they maybe restrain themselves a little. Which in itself is not right at all, but thats how it is. I know we are progressing and it is more and more acceptable, but things require time to change.

I do not hate gays, or anything ridiculous like that, I just do not like to see two men kissing, it gives me the boke!

Oh I know exactly what that feels like - I get heterosexuality shoved in my face every single day. I see straight couples holding hands and kissing on the streets - how dare they? I see them in magazines, I see them on TV. I'm going to have a nervous breakdown from the boke. It's disgraceful Joe - They shouldnt be allowed show any affection ever.

Greenmachine · 08-07-2014 3:59pm

As an atheist I sympathies with the bakery. I think the group Queer Space are simply spoiling for a fight. The issue was their message. If I requested a cake from them with the message Messiah and my ugly mug I would expect them to tell me to go hop.

Awkward Badger · 08-07-2014 4:01pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm sort of conflicted about this. I don't think the bakery should be prosecuted or forced against their will to make the cake. I'm glad however that they've been named and shamed so that people can decide not to give their custom to a place run by people with such backward views..

So you want them named and shamed for doing nothing wrong in your opinion and want their business damaged for holding views you don't agree with ? All in the name of fighting intolerance yeah ?

I'm pro same sex marriage and an atheist but I wouldn't let a few trouble seeking time waster activists put me off visiting the bakery. In fact given this is the work of people making issues where none exist in order to cry victim I'd go out of my way to give them custom to try make up somewhat for the amount of idiots who'll avoid the place.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 4:01pm

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You are completely ignoring the decisions of the elected parliament. They voted three times on Sinn Fein proposals to introduce SSM in the North and the majority was against on each occasion.

And is that right, do you think? How about if it was your right to get married?

old hippy · 08-07-2014 4:03pm

TireeTerror wrote: »

As I said I have a few friends who are gay and their sexuality is never even in the topic of conversation, but if its right in my face, then yes, I don't like it.

Most gays I have met are aware it can cause discomfort in others and they maybe restrain themselves a little. Which in itself is not right at all, but thats how it is. I know we are progressing and it is more and more acceptable, but things require time to change.

I do not hate gays, or anything ridiculous like that, I just do not like to see two men kissing, it gives me the boke!

Brilliant satire of the anti-gay crowd. Bang on! I fear most here will not get your subtle approach, mind

Annasopra · 08-07-2014 4:03pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Oh I know exactly what that feels like - I get heterosexuality shoved in my face every single day. I see straight couples holding hands and kissing on the streets - how dare they? I see them in magazines, I see them on TV. I'm going to have a nervous breakdown from the boke. It's disgraceful Joe - They shouldnt be allowed show any affection ever.

I'm not heterophobic. I have lots of hetero friends. They know if they come to my parties they have to sit apart, never kiss, never hold hands, never look at one another. It just makes me soooo uncomfortable. I really just like heterosexuality shoved in my face so I never leave my house anymore and I dont read magazines or newspapers or watch tv.

P_1 · 08-07-2014 4:14pm

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You are completely ignoring the decisions of the elected parliament. They voted three times on Sinn Fein proposals to introduce SSM in the North and the majority was against on each occasion.

Unfortunately that's a biproduct of having the DUP as the majority party up there. For some strange reason Unionists are conservative dinosaurs, who'd have thunk it eh?

floggg · 08-07-2014 4:22pm

kalmanon2 wrote: »

Once you accept the money, you have legally entered into a contract to provide services, whereas if you refuse service, you are under no obligation

You still cannot refuse to provide services pre-contract if the refusal is based on any of the 9 protected grounds

dxhound2005 · 08-07-2014 4:28pm

P_1 wrote: »

Unfortunately that's a biproduct of having the DUP as the majority party up there. For some strange reason Unionists are conservative dinosaurs, who'd have thunk it eh?

They are no different than most of the rest of the world. It is all brand new and there is much disagreement on the subject wherever discussion is allowed. Some countries don't allow any discussion and make it an offence which can be punishable by imprisonment or death.

Awkward Badger · 08-07-2014 4:28pm

floggg wrote: »

You still cannot refuse to provide services pre-contract if the refusal is based on any of the 9 protected grounds

But that applies to the customer not the product. Nobody is forced to provide everything that is wanted to all customers in relation to those 9 grounds. No crosses on sale in a nic nac shop, discrimination. No yamakas in clothing stores, discrimination.

There was no discrimination here. The customers were not refused because they were gay. The bakery simply declined to make the product. Which is no different to when they did it with pornographic images or swearing. There is no obligation on them to provide exactly what the customers wants in all circumstances under those 9 headings.

08-07-2014 4:42pm

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.

But only if they disagree with your viewpoint should they be named and shamed. If a gay baker refused to bake a cake with a message that marriage should be between a man and a woman should that baker be named and shamed?

The group which are taking this action against the bakery are trying to force their beliefs upon others. No matter how you look at it they are attempting to bully people around to their way of thinking. Personally I believe that everyone should have equal rights but this isn't about that, this is about someones religious beliefs being used against them in what is turning into a hate campaign.

Umadbrah? · 08-07-2014 4:46pm

Depends what kind of cake they wanted. .did you want Bert to be sucking on a cock?

old hippy · 08-07-2014 4:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

But only if they disagree with your viewpoint should they be named and shamed. If a gay baker refused to bake a cake with a message that marriage should be between a man and a woman should that baker be named and shamed?

The group which are taking this action against the bakery are trying to force their beliefs upon others. No matter how you look at it they are attempting to bully people around to their way of thinking. Personally I believe that everyone should have equal rights but this isn't about that, this is about someones religious beliefs being used against them in what is turning into a hate campaign.

What possible reason would a gay baker have to refuse to make a cake for a man and a woman?

Yes, it's clearly another hate campaign aimed at the oppressed heterosexuals... :rolleyes:

08-07-2014 4:52pm

old hippy wrote: »

What possible reason would a gay baker have to refuse to make a cake for a man and a woman? :

Perhaps it's a gay baker who doesn't think that any marraige should be allowed till gay people can marry.

old hippy wrote: »

Yes, it's clearly another hate campaign aimed at the oppressed heterosexuals... :rolleyes:

You are deliberately twisting everything that you disagree with to suit your agenda which you have a habit of doing. Just because somebody does not share your beliefs does not give you the right to force yours upon them. That is what is happening here, the group pressurizing the bakery are attempting to force their beliefs upon another. It's wrong, no matter how you dress it up.

No one defending the bakery believes that gay people should not have the right to marry. I'd happy vote yes to a referendum that gave them that right but at the end of the day this isn't about that. This is about a group who seem to have deliberately targeted a business run by people who have different beliefs and then attempted to shame them.

08-07-2014 4:52pm

Awkward Badger wrote: »

So you want them named and shamed for doing nothing wrong in your opinion and want their business damaged for holding views you don't agree with ? All in the name of fighting intolerance yeah ?

Meh, even if I don't think they've technically done anything wrong (though perhaps equality legislation will decide differently), that doesn't mean that their views aren't abhorrent or that they deserve any sort of hand clap for sticking to those views. I don't see why I should give a shít about the business of someone who holds such backward views, who thinks that someone like me shouldn't be allowed to marry and uses some spiel about Christian faith as a cover for their own bigotry. Why should I pretend to feel bad for them?

If people tolerate the bakery's right to be homophobic assholes then the bakery in turn should tolerate the rights of people to speak out against them for being homophobic assholes, and they should also then tolerate any nosedive in business that arises as a result.

In fact given this is the work of people making issues where none exist in order to cry victim I'd go out of my way to give them custom to try make up somewhat for the amount of idiots who'll avoid the place.

Well then you have a very skewed outlook on life imo. Religious beliefs or not, there's no argument against SSM that isn't based on homophobic bigotry (unless you're one of those anti-marriage in general people) so if you really were in favour of SSM then I wouldn't understand why you'd go out of your way to reward people who hold those kind of views.

But meh, buy your cake where you want. I'm free to avoid that business just as you're still free to go there.

mackerski · 08-07-2014 4:53pm

P_1 wrote: »

Unfortunately that's a biproduct of having the DUP as the majority party up there. For some strange reason Unionists are conservative dinosaurs, who'd have thunk it eh?

I thought the bloke from the bakery made if very clear that he won't be selling any bi-products.

old hippy · 08-07-2014 4:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps it's a gay baker who doesn't think that any marraige should be allowed till gay people can marry.

You are deliberately twisting everything that you disagree with to suit your agenda which you have a habit of doing. Just because somebody does not share your beliefs does not give you the right to force yours upon them. That is what is happening here, the group pressurizing the bakery are attempting to force their beliefs upon another. It's wrong, no matter how you dress it up.

No one defending the bakery believes that gay people should not have the right to marry. I'd happy vote yes to a referendum that gave them that right but at the end of the day this isn't about that. This is about a group who seem to have deliberately targeted a business run by people who have different beliefs and then attempted to shame them.

Sounds half baked, to me.

Perhaps they are seeking to highlight the sheer silliness of the business and its reasoning?

You may abhor the stunt but you cannot deny the power of publicity. Meekly asking people to consider change achieves very little, IMHO.

Gay Cake Controversy!

Comments