Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Nothing I can think of on the same level as printing a few words. Do you think sign makers and printers turn down work because someone wants a political banner they don't agree with? Do atheists refuse to do work that would involve religious beliefs? If they did I'd feel exactly the same about them. Petty and small minded. It comes down to religious folk being pathetic and outdated yet again. I agree on the second line, although I don't believe because someone is outdated and pathetic society should force them to do things they don't want too. I worked for Northcliffe a while back and yes they did turn down political printing for reasons of their own accord. If Bert and Ernie are lewd, then I've been watching lewd programming since I was 5 . Why does this have to be the eeeeevil activist vs the poor business owner? The owner is clearly, as I stated, a bigoted fool who is wrong, and the chap should probably get his cake elsewhere. I'd like to think that shaming the business will help drive like-minded customers away, but it may well, as you say, have the opposite effect, especially in a country as religious as Northern Ireland. The owner is clearly a bigoted fool? You draw that conclusion from a story in a newspaper? And you call others judgemental.
MooseBreath Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Two intolerant's don't make a tolerant. Passive homophobia isn't a crime and nor should it ever be.
The Doctor Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Two intolerant's don't make a tolerant. Passive homophobia isn't a crime and nor should it ever be. Once it turns into refusing service to people for their sexuality, it rightly becomes a crime. Flip it on it's head, the gay store owner refuses service to someone for being straight - how do you react to that?
Mark_w Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 You can't seriously think businesses should be forced to perform a service they don't want too? How about a "96 not enough" cake from a bakers in Liverpool or a "7/7 bombers are legends" one in London? It's just a few words. Indeed, there's absolutely no difference between this situation and those two scenarios.
Samilktray Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 What kind of business owner is he, turning down business. Moron
MooseBreath Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Once it turns into refusing service to people for their sexuality, it rightly becomes a crime. Flip it on it's head, the gay store owner refuses service to someone for being straight - how do you react to that? It isn't a crime and should never be. I would react to that in the same way as I've reacted to this - 99% don't care, 1% thinking you can't reduce intolerance by becoming more intolerant.
The Doctor Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Indeed, there's absolutely no difference between this situation and those two scenarios. Pfft, come on Mark, you know that all gays are murderers and terrorists. It isn't a crime and should never be. I would react to that in the same way as I've reacted to this - 99% don't care, 1% thinking you can't reduce intolerance by becoming more intolerant. Well that's where you're wrong. It is a crime - under the equalities act, the right of refusal cannot extend to race, religion, sexuality, age, disability or gender, and quite rightly so - if someone were to refuse service to a black person or a woman, people would be up in arms, and sexuality is no different from race or gender - at least in that you cannot change it.
Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Indeed, there's absolutely no difference between this situation and those two scenarios. Yes that's exactly what I was trying to say. Nothing to do with showing that that different people may find different things offensive and that in such a circumstance the state would have no business in deciding what you do and don't. Well that's where you're wrong. It is a crime - under the equalities act, the right of refusal cannot extend to race, religion, sexuality, age, disability or gender, and quite rightly so - if someone were to refuse service to a black person or a woman, people would be up in arms, and sexuality is no different from race or gender - at least in that you cannot change it. But they haven't refused to serve them because they are gay, they have refused to print what they consider a pro-gay slogan.
Harry - LCFC Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Yes of course, a baker (or any other business) should be allowed to do what they want with their business. I'm sure if they engage in behaviour so crass (for example, not serving someone because of the colour of their skin) they will lose it anyway as people would turn away from such bigots on mass. How obvious was it that this case was ordered with the intent of shocking and managing to create this fuss as well? The militant homosexual in Britain is a sick creature that seems to know no bounds these days, from forcing hotel rooms to have them to encouraging school kids to attend gay pride events, how long being Peter Tatchell and his perverted ilk will be trying to enforce schoolkids to 'try both' before you decide? No need to use a different hotel or bakery when you have the liberal masses prepared to help you flaunt your perversions and punish decent people just trying to do what they believe it right. I do agree that this issue is one to be resolved through speech and education rather than legal measures. But I get the impression you're taking the wrong side here. You've described them as doing "what they believe is right." In what way exactly? How can a hatred of homosexuals (and lets be clear, that's what it is) be justified as trying to 'do the right thing'? Defending people's freedom to choose doesn't involve defending their reasons for doing so. If someone holds an unpleasant belief and they try and justify it with silly reasoning like "that's what God thinks", we shouldn't patronise them by shrugging our shoulders.
Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 No one is patronising them, I've already said I find their opinions daft given it's based on religion. I still think "a hatred of homosexuals" is a bit strong as well isn't it given the evidence produced?
MooseBreath Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Well that's where you're wrong. It is a crime - under the equalities act, the right of refusal cannot extend to race, religion, sexuality, age, disability or gender, and quite rightly so - if someone were to refuse service to a black person or a woman, people would be up in arms, and sexuality is no different from race or gender - at least in that you cannot change it. Right you are. Seems absurd to me that private business owners can't decide who they serve and why, but I guess I shouldn't be too surprised given how far away from freedom of choice we've fallen in this country.
Mark_w Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 And God said, though shall not sell marzipan to lesbians, and there was much rejoicing.I do agree that you can't really punish someone for refusing to sell cake to another person, I'm just failing to understand what they think denying homosexuals cake will achieve. Do you really go to hell for selling goods to gays?
brisfox Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Just a thought. These people wanted Bert and Ernie on a cake which is covered by a copyright. Were they to do this, they would breach copyright and thus the law.
I am Rod Hull Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Just another idiotic queer propaganda stunt. They really are pathetic...
Mark_w Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Just another idiotic queer propaganda stunt. They really are pathetic... Ordering a cake, it's the oldest trick in the book.
Guest Col city fan Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Ordering a cake, it's the oldest trick in the book.
The God Emperor Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Ordering a cake, it's the oldest trick in the book. that's how the Nazis did it, chocolate cakes (white chocolate of course, can't eat a non pure blooded aryan cake can you?) with swastikas and a marzipan bust of Hitler on top. The spartacists went cheap and only made a few sponge fingers with crude icing pictures of Marx on them.
bovril Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 So who decides whats offensive? Whats offensive to you would be different to me. They aren't not being served either because they are gay, the bakery is just refusing to put a pro-homosexual slogan on a cake, if two gays want to order a normal cake they don;t see a problem with it. They have also refused to do sexual slogans and swear words, do you think they should be forced into that as well? I think this pretty much sums it up. There does seem to be a hierarchy of offense these days. I do wish the government would publish some guide lines on who I can and can't offend in order to avoid potential legal action or career suicide.
I am Rod Hull Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Ordering a cake, it's the oldest trick in the book. Why did they target this bakery? it wouldn`t be because its run by Christians would it..... Wake up son. Get them to order the same cake from a Muslim run bakery, lets face it they wouldn`t dare, but i`d love to see which side the Libs would be on
MooseBreath Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 And God said, though shall not sell marzipan to lesbians, and there was much rejoicing. I do agree that you can't really punish someone for refusing to sell cake to another person, I'm just failing to understand what they think denying homosexuals cake will achieve. Do you really go to hell for selling goods to gays? Don't know. Does being intolerant towards religious views make being bummed feel better?
Mark_w Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Why did they target this bakery? it wouldn`t be because its run Christians would it..... Wake up son. Get them to order the same cake from a Muslim run bakery, lets face it they wouldn`t dare, but i`d love to see which side the Libs would be on They targeted the bakery! Brilliant. Me and the Australian Foxes Talkers have been having secret meetings, we're planning to go to a butchers and order a salad.
Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 Why did they target this bakery? it wouldn`t be because its run by Christians would it..... Wake up son. Get them to order the same cake from a Muslim run bakery, lets face it they wouldn`t dare, but i`d love to see which side the Libs would be on I'm looking forward to the liberal reaction when the first gay couple asks to be married in a mosque, I want a front row seat for that. They targeted the bakery! Brilliant. Are you being serious or are you actually somehow managing to miss the point he is making here? I honestly can't tell.
I am Rod Hull Posted 8 July 2014 Posted 8 July 2014 They targeted the bakery! Brilliant. "Ashers Baking Company declined an order from a gay rights activist, asking for cake featuring the Sesame Street puppets, Bert and Ernie. The customer also wanted the cake to feature the logo of a Belfast-based campaign group called "Queerspace". The County Antrim firm could face legal action from the Equality Commission. The watchdog confirmed it is assisting the customer whose order was refused and has written to the baking company on his behalf. The cake was ordered for a civic event in Bangor Castle Town Hall, County Down, to mark International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia."
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.