Ashers cake controversy.

Started by T Fearon, November 07, 2014, 06:36:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pub Bore

Quote from: ziggysego on May 21, 2015, 10:28:37 AM
Quote from: StGallsGAA on May 21, 2015, 01:09:16 AM
In a Twitter war of words over The Ashers debacle Jamie Bryson has claimed he knows what he's talking about due to the fact he has a law degree.    His claim has pricked up quite a few ears And he's been challenged to give further details of where he qualified from and when but wee Jamie has gone stwangely qwiet.....

Never knew you needed a law degree to answer the phones in a taxi office!!

https://www.facebook.com/BELFASTLAD/photos/a.167845846753708.1073741828.167750270096599/367518333453124/?type=1&theater

Which has led to this  ;D

https://www.facebook.com/BELFASTLAD/photos/a.167845846753708.1073741828.167750270096599/367672533437704/?type=1&theater

Some good comments there...I think "Atticunt Finch" is my favourite though!! ;D

muppet

Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2015, 11:37:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 20, 2015, 11:32:03 PM
Is Northern Ireland's strong equality and discrimination laws as a result of the history of the likes of H&W and Shorts?
Are they stronger than in the Republic or GB? I didn't think so, but I may be wrong.

I think the employment laws are stronger, but I have only limited experience of them. There appears to be more rules and regulations than in the south, regarding religion/seniority etc.
MWWSI 2017

screenexile

I'd love to see what Bwyson's case is against LAD. . . he clearly told the Tele he's going back to finish his Law degree so they're perfectly entitled to point out the error in his argument.

It's strange though how batshit crazy him and Frazer are yet we're on here talking about them regularly. I just hope they have no actual sway in the PUL Community!

Franko

#303
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2015, 11:54:24 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 20, 2015, 11:37:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 20, 2015, 11:32:03 PM
Is Northern Ireland's strong equality and discrimination laws as a result of the history of the likes of H&W and Shorts?
Are they stronger than in the Republic or GB? I didn't think so, but I may be wrong.

I think the employment laws are stronger, but I have only limited experience of them. There appears to be more rules and regulations than in the south, regarding religion/seniority etc.

Employment laws are definitely stronger here but it's mostly in religious terms.  As a company we are committed (by law) to have completed an "Equal Opportunities Monitoring Assessment" for everyone who applies for a job.  In this form the applicants are required to divulge their sex, race etc and tick whether they belong to the Roman Catholic community, the Protestant community or neither.  Ironically, there is no mention of sexuality.  When interviewing candidates we don't see these forms but are required to keep them on file.

macdanger2

I would have originally been sceptical of the decision on the basis of business owners having a certain right to choose who they do business with (such as someone's earlier example of the t-shirt company refusing to make God Save the Queen tops or something) but when you consider it in the context of what the opposite ruling could have opened the door to (and the obvious history in NI of business owners being allowed to decide who they do business with / employ), it's probably the correct decision.

I get how he was discriminated against on the basis of his political beliefs and that there would have been no such ruling if the bakery had a blanket ban on any political messages on their cakes. But I don't understand how they ruled that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sexual orientation??

Franko

Quote from: macdanger2 on May 21, 2015, 12:18:09 PM
I would have originally been sceptical of the decision on the basis of business owners having a certain right to choose who they do business with (such as someone's earlier example of the t-shirt company refusing to make God Save the Queen tops or something) but when you consider it in the context of what the opposite ruling could have opened the door to (and the obvious history in NI of business owners being allowed to decide who they do business with / employ), it's probably the correct decision.

I get how he was discriminated against on the basis of his political beliefs and that there would have been no such ruling if the bakery had a blanket ban on any political messages on their cakes. But I don't understand how they ruled that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sexual orientation??

I'm the same.  Also, had Ashers said in their defence that they in fact do have a blanket ban on all political messages would this have worked?  Or would they have been required to display this beforehand?

screenexile

Quote from: macdanger2 on May 21, 2015, 12:18:09 PM
I would have originally been sceptical of the decision on the basis of business owners having a certain right to choose who they do business with (such as someone's earlier example of the t-shirt company refusing to make God Save the Queen tops or something) but when you consider it in the context of what the opposite ruling could have opened the door to (and the obvious history in NI of business owners being allowed to decide who they do business with / employ), it's probably the correct decision.

I get how he was discriminated against on the basis of his political beliefs and that there would have been no such ruling if the bakery had a blanket ban on any political messages on their cakes. But I don't understand how they ruled that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sexual orientation??

In the judgment the Judge reckoned that having had conversations over the weekend the McArthurs had come to the conclusion that the man was gay.

QuoteIt is significant that the 2nd named Defendant would have been prepared to fulfil the order but, after discussing the issue with the 3rd Defendant and, 'wrestling with his heart and mind', he changed his view. During those discussions it must also have been abundantly clear that the Plaintiff supported gay marriage and that in all the circumstances the 2nd Defendant must either consciously or unconsciously have had the knowledge or perception that the Plaintiff was gay and/or associated with others who are gay.

muppet

Quote from: Franko on May 21, 2015, 12:20:17 PM
Quote from: macdanger2 on May 21, 2015, 12:18:09 PM
I would have originally been sceptical of the decision on the basis of business owners having a certain right to choose who they do business with (such as someone's earlier example of the t-shirt company refusing to make God Save the Queen tops or something) but when you consider it in the context of what the opposite ruling could have opened the door to (and the obvious history in NI of business owners being allowed to decide who they do business with / employ), it's probably the correct decision.

I get how he was discriminated against on the basis of his political beliefs and that there would have been no such ruling if the bakery had a blanket ban on any political messages on their cakes. But I don't understand how they ruled that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sexual orientation??

I'm the same.  Also, had Ashers said in their defence that they in fact do have a blanket ban on all political messages would this have worked?  Or would they have been required to display this beforehand?

Would this be called the blanket defence?


I'll get my coat..........
MWWSI 2017

macdanger2

Quote from: screenexile on May 21, 2015, 12:28:22 PM
Quote from: macdanger2 on May 21, 2015, 12:18:09 PM
I would have originally been sceptical of the decision on the basis of business owners having a certain right to choose who they do business with (such as someone's earlier example of the t-shirt company refusing to make God Save the Queen tops or something) but when you consider it in the context of what the opposite ruling could have opened the door to (and the obvious history in NI of business owners being allowed to decide who they do business with / employ), it's probably the correct decision.

I get how he was discriminated against on the basis of his political beliefs and that there would have been no such ruling if the bakery had a blanket ban on any political messages on their cakes. But I don't understand how they ruled that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sexual orientation??

In the judgment the Judge reckoned that having had conversations over the weekend the McArthurs had come to the conclusion that the man was gay.

QuoteIt is significant that the 2nd named Defendant would have been prepared to fulfil the order but, after discussing the issue with the 3rd Defendant and, 'wrestling with his heart and mind', he changed his view. During those discussions it must also have been abundantly clear that the Plaintiff supported gay marriage and that in all the circumstances the 2nd Defendant must either consciously or unconsciously have had the knowledge or perception that the Plaintiff was gay and/or associated with others who are gay.

That's tenuous enough IMO. Sure it's obvious he had the knowledge that this guy was gay but if he was just looking for a non-political cake I doubt it would have been a problem.

eddie d

Gareth Lee has said he will donate the money to charity, which is a nice gesture.

Be honest, how many people on here could say they would do that after a case?

haranguerer

If it was £500 and all over the media?

All of us I'd say

Jeepers Creepers

Ashers have 6 months to raise the dough. (Coat already on..)

muppet

Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on May 21, 2015, 01:51:47 PM
Ashers have 6 months to raise the dough. (Coat already on..)

They'll find it hard to earn a crust.

(..quickly following JC out the door...)
MWWSI 2017

johnneycool

Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2015, 01:55:13 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on May 21, 2015, 01:51:47 PM
Ashers have 6 months to raise the dough. (Coat already on..)

They'll find it hard to earn a crust.

(..quickly following JC out the door...)


Very good, that is the icing on the cake!!

::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Keyser soze

Quote from: johnneycool on May 21, 2015, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2015, 01:55:13 PM
Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on May 21, 2015, 01:51:47 PM
Ashers have 6 months to raise the dough. (Coat already on..)

They'll find it hard to earn a crust.

(..quickly following JC out the door...)


Very good, that is the icing on the cake!!



::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Did the judge find that they refused service without good raisin?