Gay cake case

[polksaladallie]

Ashers Bakery lose 'gay cake' case: 'We will not be closing down, we have not done anything wrong' says boss Ashers bakery "unlawfully discriminated on the grounds of sexual orientation"

A Christian-run bakery which refused to make a cake bearing a pro-gay marriage slogan has been found guilty of discrimination after a landmark legal action at Belfast County Court.

The family-run bakery, which delivers across the UK and Ireland, turned down the request for a cake with an image of Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie below the motto Support Gay Marriage.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ashers-bakery-lose-gay-cake-case-we-will-not...

[icyfroth]

wasn't there a similar case in the US a few years ago?

btw Ireland is set to legalise gay marriage.

[icyfroth]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@bella_again wrote:

I can't help but wonder if its a deliberate act though on behalf of the Gay lobby person to bait the business.  People know the services of shops before they go in them.  It is really quite simple if a shop doesn't on the basis of their organisational stance provide a service go elsewhere!  You could argue discrimination on a number of fronts across the board in various different sectors but who goes to court in an attempt to bankrupt a business and destroy their reputation.  To me that's just another whole level of nastiness its not about equality because they are not trying to achieve that under these circumstances. Oh and its def a bait this is a UK case not the case in the US?

 There are lots of cake shops that could have supplied that service and this person went there deliberately to further their agenda and cause trouble.  The world has gone bonkers  diqupatin.

---

Or perhaps the store advertises that they will make cakes for any celebration and will write anything the buyer wishes.

---

do you always deal with perhapses?

[gleee58]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@bella_again wrote:

I can't help but wonder if its a deliberate act though on behalf of the Gay lobby person to bait the business.  People know the services of shops before they go in them.  It is really quite simple if a shop doesn't on the basis of their organisational stance provide a service go elsewhere!  You could argue discrimination on a number of fronts across the board in various different sectors but who goes to court in an attempt to bankrupt a business and destroy their reputation.  To me that's just another whole level of nastiness its not about equality because they are not trying to achieve that under these circumstances. Oh and its def a bait this is a UK case not the case in the US?

 There are lots of cake shops that could have supplied that service and this person went there deliberately to further their agenda and cause trouble.  The world has gone bonkers  diqupatin.

---

Or perhaps the store advertises that they will make cakes for any celebration and will write anything the buyer wishes.

---

do you always deal with perhapses?

---

We don't know the whole story or what went down in court. There might be a perfectly valid reason for the ruling that has been overlooked on the way to publishing a sensationalist story.

This is a discussion forum and we're all allowed to add comment.  No need to get snarly.

[gleee58]

Apparently the business took the order and the money then cancelled the order a few days later.

They lost the case because 

"The defendants are not a religious organisation. They are conducting a business for profit and, notwithstanding their genuine religious beliefs, there are no exceptions available under the 2006 regulations which apply to this case."

And now they want the law changed so they can discriminate and refuse to decorate with messages they don't agree with.

[lloydslights]

Found this

3. They can express their own views through words, not by denying services

Bakers and photographers do have one free speech right. If they disapprove of a message, that business is free to express that disagreement. They can announce their disapproval both to the client and to the public. What they can’t do, however, is deny a service that they would normally provide to the public.

A conservative Christian can tell a client that he doesn’t approve of their nuptials. He can make public statements expressing his disdain for same-sex marriage. A baker can tell a client that she finds his views on God disdainful, even as she gives him the cake.

- See more at: http://tobingrant.religionnews.com/2015/01/26/three-reasons-baking-cake-not-free-speech-issue/#sthas...

[icyfroth]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@bella_again wrote:

I can't help but wonder if its a deliberate act though on behalf of the Gay lobby person to bait the business.  People know the services of shops before they go in them.  It is really quite simple if a shop doesn't on the basis of their organisational stance provide a service go elsewhere!  You could argue discrimination on a number of fronts across the board in various different sectors but who goes to court in an attempt to bankrupt a business and destroy their reputation.  To me that's just another whole level of nastiness its not about equality because they are not trying to achieve that under these circumstances. Oh and its def a bait this is a UK case not the case in the US?

 There are lots of cake shops that could have supplied that service and this person went there deliberately to further their agenda and cause trouble.  The world has gone bonkers  diqupatin.

---

Or perhaps the store advertises that they will make cakes for any celebration and will write anything the buyer wishes.

---

do you always deal with perhapses?

---

We don't know the whole story or what went down in court. There might be a perfectly valid reason for the ruling that has been overlooked on the way to publishing a sensationalist story.

This is a discussion forum and we're all allowed to add comment.  No need to get snarly.

---

This is a discussion forum and we're all allowed to add comment.  I can get snarly if I want to. Even though I wasn't.

[youcandoityoucandoityoucandoit]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@bella_again wrote:

I can't help but wonder if its a deliberate act though on behalf of the Gay lobby person to bait the business.  People know the services of shops before they go in them.  It is really quite simple if a shop doesn't on the basis of their organisational stance provide a service go elsewhere!  You could argue discrimination on a number of fronts across the board in various different sectors but who goes to court in an attempt to bankrupt a business and destroy their reputation.  To me that's just another whole level of nastiness its not about equality because they are not trying to achieve that under these circumstances. Oh and its def a bait this is a UK case not the case in the US?

 There are lots of cake shops that could have supplied that service and this person went there deliberately to further their agenda and cause trouble.  The world has gone bonkers  diqupatin.

---

Or perhaps the store advertises that they will make cakes for any celebration and will write anything the buyer wishes.

---

do you always deal with perhapses?

---

We don't know the whole story or what went down in court. There might be a perfectly valid reason for the ruling that has been overlooked on the way to publishing a sensationalist story.

This is a discussion forum and we're all allowed to add comment.  No need to get snarly.

---

Whats wrong with using the word perhaps?

[imastawka]

Perhaps it's not always appropriate

[digupatin]

---

@imastawka wrote:

Perhaps it's not always appropriate

---

Perhaps you're right?  

[icyfroth]

---

@youcandoityoucandoityoucandoit wrote:

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@gleee58 wrote:

---

@bella_again wrote:

I can't help but wonder if its a deliberate act though on behalf of the Gay lobby person to bait the business.  People know the services of shops before they go in them.  It is really quite simple if a shop doesn't on the basis of their organisational stance provide a service go elsewhere!  You could argue discrimination on a number of fronts across the board in various different sectors but who goes to court in an attempt to bankrupt a business and destroy their reputation.  To me that's just another whole level of nastiness its not about equality because they are not trying to achieve that under these circumstances. Oh and its def a bait this is a UK case not the case in the US?

 There are lots of cake shops that could have supplied that service and this person went there deliberately to further their agenda and cause trouble.  The world has gone bonkers  diqupatin.

---

Or perhaps the store advertises that they will make cakes for any celebration and will write anything the buyer wishes.

---

do you always deal with perhapses?

---

We don't know the whole story or what went down in court. There might be a perfectly valid reason for the ruling that has been overlooked on the way to publishing a sensationalist story.

This is a discussion forum and we're all allowed to add comment.  No need to get snarly.

---

Whats wrong with using the word perhaps?

---

When you're trying to make a statement or defend an opinion, "perhaps" is just an assumption and not a fact.