Ashers cake controversy.

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

Previous topic - Next topic

omaghjoe

Quote from: easytiger95 on October 25, 2016, 07:27:58 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on October 25, 2016, 07:12:44 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on October 25, 2016, 06:03:12 PM
I have no stress with you Joe, I just prefer to sticking to the point of the thread (a case which the central theme was discrimination against homosexuals, which was why I was pointing out Seafoid's generalisations about homosexuals) rather than getting into a discussion with you about neuro -psychology.

If you want to start a thread about quantum physics, please go ahead - you need neither my permission nor my participation.

I was picking up a point that you had made ET about psychology and biology being different. The accuracy of that statement would be crucial to your counter of seafoids point, I was merely asking if it was correct or not (as its against the current prevailing thought in medical terms), cos unless it was an accurate statement your counter collapses. Not that Im actually on either side of the discussion but the validity of your statement is very debatable.

It was more meta than quantum, but anyway dont think there is alot of interest on here so Id be wasting my time. I thought you might have been since you posted it, but it would appear not.

Are you sure you dont get stressed? You always you seem to be fierce angry with me?

I'm confident in my argument as it stands Joe, with or without your judgement on the matter. Not angry at all with you, just not wasting my time with you. Big difference.

Its certainly not my judgement, its the prevailing opinion in medicine. In fact Im probably more with you that they're seperate. However its basically unknown either way so your point is on shaky turf.
Also Im just wondering if you still hold your opinion in spite of the medical opinion to the contrary?

easytiger95

Quote from: omaghjoe on October 25, 2016, 07:45:39 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on October 25, 2016, 07:27:58 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on October 25, 2016, 07:12:44 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on October 25, 2016, 06:03:12 PM
I have no stress with you Joe, I just prefer to sticking to the point of the thread (a case which the central theme was discrimination against homosexuals, which was why I was pointing out Seafoid's generalisations about homosexuals) rather than getting into a discussion with you about neuro -psychology.

If you want to start a thread about quantum physics, please go ahead - you need neither my permission nor my participation.

I was picking up a point that you had made ET about psychology and biology being different. The accuracy of that statement would be crucial to your counter of seafoids point, I was merely asking if it was correct or not (as its against the current prevailing thought in medical terms), cos unless it was an accurate statement your counter collapses. Not that Im actually on either side of the discussion but the validity of your statement is very debatable.

It was more meta than quantum, but anyway dont think there is alot of interest on here so Id be wasting my time. I thought you might have been since you posted it, but it would appear not.

Are you sure you dont get stressed? You always you seem to be fierce angry with me?

I'm confident in my argument as it stands Joe, with or without your judgement on the matter. Not angry at all with you, just not wasting my time with you. Big difference.

Its certainly not my judgement, its the prevailing opinion in medicine. In fact Im probably more with you that they're seperate. However its basically unknown either way so your point is on shaky turf.
Also Im just wondering if you still hold your opinion in spite of the medical opinion to the contrary?

easytiger95

Ah the omaghjoe default position. Have you ever heard of a rhetorical device? Look it up.

oisinog

Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.

imtommygunn

I think they are still doing ok. I notice they seem to supply tescos. They also opened a big place in belfast city centre post this and it always look busy. While they will lose business from some after this they will also gain quite a bit i think.

Main Street

Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.
Maybe the  brethren from 'ulster say no  to .....  ( fill in space with appropriate armageddon)'  organised a fighting fund for the Ashers.

i

oisinog

Quote from: Main Street on October 25, 2016, 09:37:15 PM
Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.
Maybe the  brethren from 'ulster say no  to .....  ( fill in space with appropriate armageddon)'  organised a fighting fund for the Ashers.

i

That the probably did and the amount of advertising they have received probably comes to more than the legal costs.

Hopefully the winners from this will be the LGBT community who's own marriage will be recognised is this wee backward county we live in

imtommygunn

Nothing like that will ever happen while the dup have the ability to play the petition of concern card.

I would suspect ashers won't end up poor from it either.

johnneycool


Tony Baloney

Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.
Asher's won't pay a penny of that themselves.

5 Sams

Quote from: Tony Baloney on October 25, 2016, 10:08:54 PM
Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.
Asher's won't pay a penny of that themselves.

Heard that today..wont cost them a cent..
60,61,68,91,94
The Aristocrat Years

T Fearon

#431
Of course it is we,the taxpayers,who will foot the bill as usual.Time the discredited equality commission was scrapped altogether >:(. You cannot profess to be a Christian then print anti Christian messages, even as part of a business transaction.In fact I would contend that making money by doing so is even more hypocritical, and insulting.

Gay supremacy must be halted now.

Rossfan

Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 09:44:12 PM
Quote from: Main Street on October 25, 2016, 09:37:15 PM
Quote from: oisinog on October 25, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Main street I used those reasons as an example. I'm sure if the owners look hard enough they would have found a legitimate reason to turn the order down.

As I said they were probably targeted but Mr Lee works for am LGBT charity so they may have received several complaints that this was happening. At the end of the day the owners of Asher's are now facing a legal bill of 180000 for turning down a service.
Maybe the  brethren from 'ulster say no  to .....  ( fill in space with appropriate armageddon)'  organised a fighting fund for the Ashers.

i

That the probably did and the amount of advertising they have received probably comes to more than the legal costs.

Hopefully the winners from this will be the LGBT community who's own marriage will be recognised is this wee backward county we live in
Can gay Nordie couples as Irish citizens not get married in the 26 Cos or as Brit citizens not get married in England, Scotland or Wales.
Davy's given us a dream to cling to
We're going to bring home the SAM

David McKeown

Quote from: T Fearon on October 25, 2016, 10:53:34 PM
Of course it is we,the taxpayers,who will foot the bill as usual.Time the discredited equality commission was scrapped altogether >:(. You cannot profess to be a Christian then print anti Christian messages, even as part of a business transaction.In fact I would contend that making money by doing so is even more hypocritical, and insulting.

Gay supremacy must be halted now.

No one is forcing them to print anti Christian messages, if Ashers didn't want to print cakes with messages about Gay marriage they don't have to providing they don't then print messages about marriage.  The position would be the same for a Gay baker, if they weren't prepared to print a cake saying support heterosexual marriage only then they couldn't print a cake saying support Gay marriage.

Printing a cake does not mean you ascribe to or endorse the message on the cake.  It simply means you are providing a service.

It was the same for the hotel owners in England, don't want gay couples staying in your hotel thats fine then as long as no couples are entitled to stay. 

It is equality not gay supremacy
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

omaghjoe

Quote from: easytiger95 on October 25, 2016, 07:53:52 PM
Ah the omaghjoe default position. Have you ever heard of a rhetorical device? Look it up.

Here you go Tiger from wikipedia:

In rhetoric, a rhetorical device or resource of language is a technique that an author or speaker uses to convey to the listener or reader a meaning with the goal of persuading him or her towards considering a topic from a different perspective, using sentences designed to encourage or provoke a rational argument from an emotional display of a given perspective or action. Rhetorical devices can be used to evoke an emotional response in the audience, and that is not their primary purpose.

I dont really see how pointing out the problems with your point is trying to persuade you of anything, and perhaps even more to the point what the problem would be with using a rhetorical device it? Seems to me to be the basis of debate?

Maybe you could explain how I was using a rhetorical device and what the problem with it is?