Ashers cake controversy.

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

Previous topic - Next topic

muppet

Quote from: LCohen on November 09, 2014, 08:08:16 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 08, 2014, 11:37:36 PM
Quote from: LCohen on November 08, 2014, 11:34:14 PM
Quote from: muppet on November 08, 2014, 11:24:25 PM
Quote from: LCohen on November 08, 2014, 11:15:33 PM
I'm well aware that we have plenty of laws on discrimination in NI. It is my contention that religious belief is not a means to evade these legal provisions.

The reason why I asked which legal provisions you were referring to you seemed to be indicating that there was something in the NI statutiry provisions that allowed for religious belief to trump the anti-discrimination laws.

There you go again.

This is what I said: "but there are laws regarding both sexual discrimination and religious freedom."

That's all I said.

And I never said or suggested that religious belief trumped anti-discrimination laws. That would be a long way from my thinking. Religious belief has influenced the evolution of our laws, certainly. More is the pity.

You posted

"Unlike the post earlier regarding the banning of hoodies etc, there are no discrimination laws regarding hoodies, but there are laws regarding both sexual discrimination and religious freedom"

Surely the fact that there are laws on sexual discrimination makes it more likely that this discrimination should be prosecuted.

The laws on religious freedom are to proect the right to believe. Not the right to use belief as a justification for discriminatory acts.

Hence my opening question:

"Is denying your services based on sexual orientation, discrimination or religious freedom?"

I may have mis-read your earlier post.

Lets be clear I am in no way to blame for this misunderstanding. The fault lies entirely with Messrs J. Sexton & A. Guinness

I see. I was talking to a Mister Trapiche.
MWWSI 2017

Main Street

Quote from: LCohen on November 08, 2014, 03:00:06 PM

If Ashers Bakery are refusing to provide cakes in support of marriage then they might find themselves in some commercial difficulty. But seemingly they are fine with marriage. Just not marriage for everyone who wants it. This again brings us into discrimination territory and the need for some legal clarity. And what could be wrong with that?
According to the law of the statelet, there is nothing wrong with discrimination in this sphere,  where the state selectively does not support or recognising gay marriage. 
As i explained, this is a moronic action to look for that legal clarity, that's what I think is wrong.

David McKeown

This is a difficult one, if it was a product that by its very nature offended the religious beliefs of those being asked to produce then I would have no issue with them refusing its production, the example of the non kosher food from the kosher butchers being a good example.  Conversely if this was a service and wasn't being offered to someone because of an individual trait such as their religion or sexuality I would be up in arms. This though is a bit of an in between, as far as I understand and I could be wrong but Ashers agreed to provide a wedding cake to the couple but refused to decorate it with the symbol of a group that advocates Gay marriage?  That seems to be one that falls in between the two extremes, I would be interested in the ruling in this case.  Think though that in all fairness Ashers should have some protection from costs in this situation.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

brokencrossbar1

Ashers can count themselves lucky!!

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/02/03/bakery-will-pay-up-to-150000-for-discriminating-against-gay-couple/

QuoteA bakery unlawfully discriminated against a gay couple, and is liable to pay up to $150,000 in damages, it was announced on Monday.
Now facing a fine of up to $150,000 (£93,000), the owners of Sweet Cakes By Melissa which refused to provide a cake for a lesbian wedding may go bankrupt.
The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries announced on Monday that it had concluded its investigation, and that the owners of Sweet Cakes had unlawfully discriminated.
The bakery may be made to pay up to $75,000 (£50,000) per person, meaning it could face paying damages of up to $150,000 (£100,000).
An amount will be determined at a hearing on 10 March.
The owners of Sweet Cakes, an Oregon Bakery which last year closed its doors after refusing to provide a wedding cake to a same-sex couple, later accused gay activists of using "militant, mafia-style tactics" to force their business to shut down.
They have since run the business from their home, after the bakery closed its doors.
Aaron and Melissa Klein, the owners of the bakery, spoke at the Values Voter Summit in Washington DC, to say the fine was "definitely" enough to bankrupt them and their family.
Mr Klein suggested the state had "broken its own anti-discrimination laws", saying a judge did not strike down the state's same-sex marriage ban until way after the controversy took place.
Melissa Klein added: "It's definitely impacted us pretty hard financially, and it's been a little stressful, but...we have the Lord and so He's been keeping us strong."
The bakery posted pictures on its Facebook page in the summer of several cakes it had made for the 'ex-gay' Restored Hope Network, adding: "Cakes for Restored Hope Network. What a wonderful ministry!"

illdecide

So what happened Ashers? Did they get off?
I can swim a little but i can't fly an inch

Orior

Is it any wonder that Cameron and the BBC dont want irish politicians to participate in a serious debate. Apologies if there is another thread about this.

Hot topics for irish politicians:
1) No gays allowed to give blood
2) People should be allowed to discriminate against gays
3) Flags
4) Parades
5) No fracking please, the earth is only 6,000 years old
etc etc
Cover me in chocolate and feed me to the lesbians


T Fearon

DUP have started a war chest donation appeal to raise funds for Ashers legal expenses

tyssam5

#98
Quote from: David McKeown on November 10, 2014, 04:09:57 PM
This is a difficult one, if it was a product that by its very nature offended the religious beliefs of those being asked to produce then I would have no issue with them refusing its production, the example of the non kosher food from the kosher butchers being a good example.  Conversely if this was a service and wasn't being offered to someone because of an individual trait such as their religion or sexuality I would be up in arms. This though is a bit of an in between, as far as I understand and I could be wrong but Ashers agreed to provide a wedding cake to the couple but refused to decorate it with the symbol of a group that advocates Gay marriage?  That seems to be one that falls in between the two extremes, I would be interested in the ruling in this case.  Think though that in all fairness Ashers should have some protection from costs in this situation.

So from your first sentence is it then perfectly fine for them to refuse a cake for any Catholic wedding? As we know some Free Presbyterians find that religion 'by it's very nature offensive'?

deiseach

Quote from: tyssam5 on February 03, 2015, 11:08:52 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on November 10, 2014, 04:09:57 PM
This is a difficult one, if it was a product that by its very nature offended the religious beliefs of those being asked to produce then I would have no issue with them refusing its production, the example of the non kosher food from the kosher butchers being a good example.  Conversely if this was a service and wasn't being offered to someone because of an individual trait such as their religion or sexuality I would be up in arms. This though is a bit of an in between, as far as I understand and I could be wrong but Ashers agreed to provide a wedding cake to the couple but refused to decorate it with the symbol of a group that advocates Gay marriage?  That seems to be one that falls in between the two extremes, I would be interested in the ruling in this case.  Think though that in all fairness Ashers should have some protection from costs in this situation.

So from your first sentence is it then perfectly fine for them to refuse a cake for any Catholic wedding? As we know some Free Presbyterians find that religion 'by it's very nature offensive'?

As far as I know, Ashers didn't refuse to serve a gay person. They refused to make a particular type of cake that they considered to be offensive to their beliefs. So with regards to your Catholic example, it would be okay to refuse to make a specific type of cake for a Catholic wedding, but not okay to refuse to sell them one off the shelf. That would be my way of looking at it.

David McKeown

Quote from: tyssam5 on February 03, 2015, 11:08:52 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on November 10, 2014, 04:09:57 PM
This is a difficult one, if it was a product that by its very nature offended the religious beliefs of those being asked to produce then I would have no issue with them refusing its production, the example of the non kosher food from the kosher butchers being a good example.  Conversely if this was a service and wasn't being offered to someone because of an individual trait such as their religion or sexuality I would be up in arms. This though is a bit of an in between, as far as I understand and I could be wrong but Ashers agreed to provide a wedding cake to the couple but refused to decorate it with the symbol of a group that advocates Gay marriage?  That seems to be one that falls in between the two extremes, I would be interested in the ruling in this case.  Think though that in all fairness Ashers should have some protection from costs in this situation.

So from your first sentence is it then perfectly fine for them to refuse a cake for any Catholic wedding? As we know some Free Presbyterians find that religion 'by it's very nature offensive'?

No that's most certainly not what my first sentence suggests. If a bakery refused to provide a cake to someone because of their religious beliefs (I.e because they were Catholic) that would not be fine as you put it because that's not a case that the product by its nature offending the religious beliefs that would be a situation where the service is refused to someone because of their religion. If however a bakery agreed to provide the cake but refused to decorate it with Catholic symbols because that offended their religious beliefs then that would be into an almost identical grey area as the Ashers case.

If however their was a religious requirement that prevented cakes being made a certain way (perhaps something akin to the way kosher products are made) then it might be acceptable on religious grounds to refuse to produce a cake but that's highly unlikely in the example you give.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

Fiodoir Ard Mhacha

This thread is despairing to read, never mind the side swipes and occasional homophobia. 

I'd rather wait on the ruling but suffice to say, believing any church or religion's teaching is 'right' because it represents the 'view of the majority' is outdated, naive and possibly dangerous.

Homosexual activities were outlawed in NI until 1982 but that doesn't mean it was wrong, immoral or not happening! It just meant the law stated men could be prosecuted if apprehended. 

Times change, people's entrenched attitudes take a little longer, but I'm hoping for a sensible ruling here to give some that little nudge they need to accept life, in all its diversity, as it is now.
"Something wrong with your eyes?....
Yes, they're sensitive to questions!"

deiseach

Quote from: Fiodoir Ard Mhacha on February 05, 2015, 01:26:44 PM
This thread is despairing to read, never mind the side swipes and occasional homophobia. 

I'd rather wait on the ruling but suffice to say, believing any church or religion's teaching is 'right' because it represents the 'view of the majority' is outdated, naive and possibly dangerous.

Homosexual activities were outlawed in NI until 1982 but that doesn't mean it was wrong, immoral or not happening! It just meant the law stated men could be prosecuted if apprehended. 

Times change, people's entrenched attitudes take a little longer, but I'm hoping for a sensible ruling here to give some that little nudge they need to accept life, in all its diversity, as it is now.

What would amount to a "sensible ruling"?

illdecide

Quote from: deiseach on February 05, 2015, 01:56:10 PM
Quote from: Fiodoir Ard Mhacha on February 05, 2015, 01:26:44 PM
This thread is despairing to read, never mind the side swipes and occasional homophobia. 

I'd rather wait on the ruling but suffice to say, believing any church or religion's teaching is 'right' because it represents the 'view of the majority' is outdated, naive and possibly dangerous.

Homosexual activities were outlawed in NI until 1982 but that doesn't mean it was wrong, immoral or not happening! It just meant the law stated men could be prosecuted if apprehended. 

Times change, people's entrenched attitudes take a little longer, but I'm hoping for a sensible ruling here to give some that little nudge they need to accept life, in all its diversity, as it is now.

What would amount to a "sensible ruling"?

"The Chair"
I can swim a little but i can't fly an inch

deiseach