Gay activist goes out of his way to be offended.

[armaghniac]

The Old Testament is neither here nor there in this, it is not an issue with anything in particular to do with the Bible.

[Zulu]

He justified his decision by referencing what the bible said.

[Corner Forward]

I'd expect that if this were to go to court, the legal argument would centre around whether they were refused because they were gay (which I'd assume is illegal) or because they were offended by the message (which may not be)

My take on it as well. If a straight couple walked in the same bakery and asked for the same cake and the bakery made the cake as requested then it has discriminated against the original customer as they have refused to provide him with a service that they are prepared to offer to straight people. However if the bakery's stance (which i assume it is) is to refuse any customer regardless or sex, race, religion or sexuality a cake which contains a message they find to be offensive then IMO they are perfectly within their right to do so.

The difference with the B&B case was the owners refused to allow a gay couple to share the same room however they would allow for straight couples to do the same. Therefore they refused a particular group of people a service that they would offer to anybody else based on their sexuality which is discrimination.

[Main Street]

I'd expect that if this were to go to court, the legal argument would centre around whether they were refused because they were gay (which I'd assume is illegal) or because they were offended by the message (which may not be)

My take on it as well. If a straight couple walked in the same bakery and asked for the same cake and the bakery made the cake as requested then it has discriminated against the original customer as they have refused to provide him with a service that they are prepared to offer to straight people. However if the bakery's stance (which i assume it is) is to refuse any customer regardless or sex, race, religion or sexuality a cake which contains a message they find to be offensive then IMO they are perfectly within their right to do so.

The difference with the B&B case was the owners refused to allow a gay couple to share the same room however they would allow for straight couples to do the same. Therefore they refused a particular group of people a service that they would offer to anybody else based on their sexuality which is discrimination.

That would be my opinion as well, the bakery didn't refuse service to people because they are gay or black or muslim or catholic, they refused to do a a decoration on a cake which they had a strong issue with.
Maybe the cake has a case?
There was a request for the bakery to offer compensation followed by a threat of legal action.
That shows a lack of respect towards conservative people in business who have radically different social and religious views. It's precisely this type of aggressive action is why I wouldn't support gay rights activism in the form of  Queerspace or why I would refuse (if asked) to do something for them  to further such anti social agendas. And that has nothing at all to do with discrimination against gays.

[haranguerer]

Would you support their action if they had refused a cake celebrating Rosa Parks action, because in this case, their 'radically different social and religous views' meant they viewed blacks as a sub-race?

Going by what you're saying, you would, and if there was a row about it in the papers, you'd then avoid doing anything for anti-racism groups (if asked), or support any anti racist activism.

Fair enough.

[gallsman]

Personally while I have nothing against gay marriage I do think that this is perhaps taking things a little too far.

As has been said before you could apply similar logic to a variety of places...

Could you for example go into a flag shop (as it's a PC hot potato) on sandy rowe or the shankill and either buy a tricolour or order one? I very much doubt it.

If you apply a similar logic to Rosa Parks, you see where you end up??

Everyone is entitled to their personal views but if you supply a service to the public, you have to supply to all in society equally

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

[Zip Code]

Some sections of society go out of their way to be offended.

[gallsman]

Some sections of society go out of their way to be offended.

I don't know how you can generalise this one incident as reflective of the whole gay community?

[haranguerer]

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

Do you think you've been discriminated against?

[Main Street]

Would you support their action if they had refused a cake celebrating Rosa Parks action, because in this case, their 'radically different social and religous views' meant they viewed blacks as a sub-race?

Going by what you're saying, you would, and if there was a row about it in the papers, you'd then avoid doing anything for anti-racism groups (if asked), or support any anti racist activism.

Fair enough.

That's not an argument, just a bundle of assumptions and fallacies, out of which you have constructed a strawman's argument, agreeable to yourself.

[macdanger2]

Personally while I have nothing against gay marriage I do think that this is perhaps taking things a little too far.

As has been said before you could apply similar logic to a variety of places...

Could you for example go into a flag shop (as it's a PC hot potato) on sandy rowe or the shankill and either buy a tricolour or order one? I very much doubt it.

If you apply a similar logic to Rosa Parks, you see where you end up??

Everyone is entitled to their personal views but if you supply a service to the public, you have to supply to all in society equally

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

If they don't cook beef dishes for anybody so no discrimination I'd say. If they're actually Bengali, then they're more likely to be Muslims than Hindus at any rate 

Considering the writing on the cake was fairly inoffensive, personally I think that this is a case of discrimination. If it was something outlandish which most people would be offended by then I think they'd be within their rights but it looks to me as if they're offended by what the message stands for. It'll probably come down to legal semantics anyway.

If I lived around there, I'd certainly boycott them

[gallsman]

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

Do you think you've been discriminated against?

Not in the slightest!

[haranguerer]

Would you support their action if they had refused a cake celebrating Rosa Parks action, because in this case, their 'radically different social and religous views' meant they viewed blacks as a sub-race?

Going by what you're saying, you would, and if there was a row about it in the papers, you'd then avoid doing anything for anti-racism groups (if asked), or support any anti racist activism.

Fair enough.

That's not an argument, just a bundle of assumptions and fallacies, out of which you have constructed a strawman's argument, agreeable to yourself.

Its solidly based on exactly what you said, just racism (being much more accepted as being wrong), has been subsituted for homophobia. Feel free to point out the 'fallacies' you refer to.

[haranguerer]

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

Do you think you've been discriminated against?

Not in the slightest!

Well then, you shouldn't contact the Equality commission.

[johnneycool]

Personally while I have nothing against gay marriage I do think that this is perhaps taking things a little too far.

As has been said before you could apply similar logic to a variety of places...

Could you for example go into a flag shop (as it's a PC hot potato) on sandy rowe or the shankill and either buy a tricolour or order one? I very much doubt it.

If you apply a similar logic to Rosa Parks, you see where you end up??

Everyone is entitled to their personal views but if you supply a service to the public, you have to supply to all in society equally

They supply a service to the public, as a private enterprise. Not a public service. While I disagree with the stance of the bakery, I believe they should not be obliged to fulfill an order they do not feel comfortable with. By all means they should receive a heap of bad press for being so old fashioned and should perhaps be boycotted, but legal action? Too far.

I went to the Bengal Brasserie on Sunday and discovered they wouldn't cook me any beef dishes. I presume this is at odds with their (presumably) Hindu beliefs. Should I contact the Equality Commission? Have I been discriminated against?

KFC don't do beef burgers, are they discriminating?