'Gay cake' row

[Samilktray]

A lot of homophobic undertones in this thread.

[bovril]

The best thing about the whole story is that the general manager of the company recorded his statement, straight-faced, in front of a poster advertising "four chilli sausage rolls".

[Guest MattP]

Transphobia

How long before we get Paedophiles shotuing 'peadophobe' at any right minded person who finds them disgusting as the first step to brainwashing society into giving them some legitimacy?

[DennisNedry]

I'd have baked them a cake with one of the blokes getting bent over and rogered by Big Wes. Take it or leave it.

[Mark_w]

Are you being serious or are you actually somehow managing to miss the point he is making here?

I honestly can't tell.

I must be missing the point. It strikes me that he thinks they've deliberately found Christians to order their cake from in order to get some publicity. I think it's a lot more feasible that they just wanted a cake and happened to choose a bakery owned by Christians. Unless I'm missing something here.

Transphobia

How long before we get Paedophiles shotuing 'peadophobe' at any right minded person who finds them disgusting as the first step to brainwashing society into giving them some legitimacy?

Wow. That's almost as stupid as your 'there are no living holocaust survivors' post.

[Dr The Singh]

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.

I'm tempted to go to a muslim, hindu and sikh bakery to see what happens!!!

[bovril]

I find it incredibly disturbing that you can be punished for refusing to promote a cause you don't believe in. Are they not also allowed to refuse slogans promoting groups or political parties that are anti-gay marriage?

[Guest MattP]

I must be missing the point. It strikes me that he thinks they've deliberately found Christians to order their cake from in order to get some publicity. I think it's a lot more feasible that they just wanted a cake and happened to choose a bakery owned by Christians. Unless I'm missing something here.

Yes that's what he is saying, which is very possible given that a while ago we saw two queers deliberately target that elderdy christian hotel couple a while back in order to claim some compo.

Lot of money and PR in this sort of thing now, it all started when Christopher Biggins decided to come out as he was skint.

I find it incredibly disturbing that you can be punished for refusing to promote a cause you don't believe in. Are they not also allowed to refuse slogans promoting groups or political parties that are anti-gay marriage?

It's absolutely frigtening some people are actually sleepwalking into this sort of thing without even thinking about what the future consequences of it could be.

[Mark_w]

Yes that's what he is saying, which is very possible given that a while ago we saw two queers deliberately target that elderdy christian hotel couple a while back in order to claim some compo.

Lot of money and PR in this sort of thing now, it all started when Christopher Biggins decided to come out as he was skint.

Yeah, it's either that or they just wanted a cake and had no idea that they'd get such a ridiculous response. Think the latter is probably a bit more plausible.

[The God Emperor]

It's absolutely frigtening some people are actually sleepwalking into this sort of thing without even thinking about what the future consequences of it could be.

When it comes to a choice between equality/security and freedom. Freedom loses every time, enjoy it while it lasts.

[Samilktray]

Yeah, it's either that or they just wanted a cake and had no idea that they'd get such a ridiculous response. Think the latter is probably a bit more plausible.

These demonic gays are targeting honest, hard working Christians. Open your eyes.

[fuchsntf]

If the baker does not want his beliefs compromised then he should live in a monastery. If you live in the real world you have to deal with whatever that might bring.

Just to be argumentive, would it be appropiate, to have a paedophile cake.> you all can write and inform me that you cant compare < but I say 2 things, #one Most likely the 2nd oldest past time the other the 3rd.

#The N.Irish ruling presently do not recognise the right of same sex marriage.

Just proves sometimes you just cant have your cake and eat it.

Plus the baker did deal with it, he said NO..

Just to show how weird discrimination can be...why do we still have gay bars, places of worship, denying others Entry, or refusing cross belief marriages. Or in the freeist land of all USA, in Harlem, where whites are still not welcome.The real world is a compot of discrimination of interpretatation.

[Charl91]

Transphobia

How long before we get Paedophiles shotuing 'peadophobe' at any right minded person who finds them disgusting as the first step to brainwashing society into giving them some legitimacy?

What? How is that the same? I don't think accepting homosexuals is the same as accepting paedophiles.

As for this cake business, it's a bit ridiculous. If it was a case of refusing to serve people because they're homosexuals, then fine, they'd certainly have a case. But that's not the same as telling people they have to provide a certain service. The bakers have the right to put/not put whatever they want on their cakes.

I wouldn't make a Hindu serve me a burger nor a muslim a sausage; I also wouldn't go to a family bakery and ask for a giant penis cake. People should use their common sense really.

[sphericalfox]

Same here.

But we all know exactly why they ordered it from there, they knew what they were doing.

Fook me Matt, what is the likelihood of a bakery in Belfast being run by a Christian/Catholic...? Yeah they specifically ignored all the other atheist bakeries that occupy every corner of Northern Ireland.

[fuchsntf]

What? How is that the same? I don't think accepting homosexuals is the same as accepting paedophiles.

As for this cake business, it's a bit ridiculous. If it was a case of refusing to serve people because they're homosexuals, then fine, they'd certainly have a case. But that's not the same as telling people they have to provide a certain service. The bakers have the right to put/not put whatever they want on their cakes.

I wouldn't make a Hindu serve me a burger nor a muslim a sausage; I also wouldn't go to a family bakery and ask for a giant penis cake. People should use their common sense really.

Get your point, but hindus will not refuse to serve you a burger, in fact many hindu ran places, actually do serve, all types of food and meat.

[Harry - LCFC]

Anyone remember the case of the Muslims who refused to sell pork products in M&S a while back? It's much the same thing here really. Two groups, both motivated by religion, refusing a service to others.

Why is it that we have people keen to highlight the individual's right to choose in one case while openly attacking them in the other? I'm reminded of David Starkey on Question Time - happy to bash one group for their silly views (and rightly so) but keen to let the Christians off for similar offences.

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?

Hmmm not sure it is actually. They'll believe what they believe because of God's teaching that the homosexual is an inferior being. Have to say that's a bit low - thinking someone's inferior for who they are.

Don't know. Does being intolerant towards religious views make being bummed feel better?

Are you really trying to paint the non-homophobes as the oppressor here?

Excuse my arrogance for thinking this sort of behaviour isn't particularly pleasant. I'll try and be more accepting of these sort of backwards views in future.

EDIT: Unless you were talking about the people wanting to use the court to prosecute them, in which case forget all that.

[MooseBreath]

Are you really trying to paint the non-homophobes as the oppressor here?

Excuse my arrogance for thinking this sort of behaviour isn't particularly pleasant. I'll try and be more accepting of these sort of backwards views in future.

So you're intolerant towards religious views, fine, but how can you then preach tolerance to all? Seems a bit hypocritical no?

[Alf Bentley]

Yes, they should be able to refuse this order. Otherwise, it would be an infringement of their freedom of self-expression.

I disagree with their opposition to gay marriage - and their probable opposition to homosexuality. But nobody should force them to use their products to support things they don't believe in. Some might take the view that they'd really just be providing the cake, not the message, but if they don't take that view their feelings should be respected.

I work self-employed as a translator. If the BNP contacted me to translate a Marine LePen speech for use in a campaign for the repatriation of all asylum seekers, I'd want the right to refuse their business.

The case of the gay couple at the B&B is less clearcut as they weren't promoting a particular campaign, just wanting to stay at the B&B. Limiting entry/business to particular groups should be allowed, in my view: I shouldn't have the right to demand entry to a club set up for Pakistani women or a Tory gentlemen's club, and such places should have the right to limit entry to particular groups....excluding particular groups based purely on sexuality (or race/gender) while allowing almost anyone else in is pretty dodgy, though.

Then again, if I walked into a gay pub and was made unwelcome because I was straight, I'd want to leave rather than demand equality! Likewise, if Nick Griffin contacted me to translate some perfectly innocent personal letters from a French mate, I'd still want the freedom to refuse, because I wouldn't want to be associated with a bloke of his opinions....while not wanting him banned!

When I was at Uni, I ended up in conflict with the Labour Club (of which I was a member at the time) as they wanted to have David Irving's holocaust denial history books removed from the library. Stupid - and wrong! Firstly, banning things is nearly always counter-productive. Secondly, people have a right to form their own opinions. Education is better than banning or forcing people to do things.

Bottom line: People should have as much freedom of expression as possible, without the state or anyone else forcing them to do things they don't want to do - or banning them from doing things that they do want to do....provided that they aren't inciting hatred or something.

[Mark_w]

So you're intolerant towards religious views, fine, but how can you then preach tolerance to all? Seems a bit hypocritical no?

You aimed that first post at me and I certainly never said society should be tolerant of everyone and everything.

[sdb]

Mark_w

[MooseBreath]

You aimed that first post at me and I certainly never said society should be tolerant of everyone and everything.

So it's OK for people to be intolerant? Then what's the problem?

[FoxyPV]

What's the problem with trying both, Matt?

It's just more pleasure from more people

[Rincewind]

He could always make up some other excuse that did not attract publicity or the ones that ordered could try another cakemaker. The cakemake will lose custom from open minded people but may attract custom from their inner circle of christians. I certainly would avoid them and would tell friends and relatives to avoid them.

[fuchsntf]

You know what, I have many homosexual aquiantences, I wont deny many of their rights, but I hate their act that give them the name homosexual, Am I now being discriminating.?????

[Mark_w]

You know what, I have many homosexual aquiantences, I wont deny many of their rights, but I hate their act that give them the name homosexual, Am I now being discriminating.?????

No you're just being stupid.