We Are Not Gay Bakers

[Bazile]

Another one of these rulings

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32791239

This is a bit odd though

//His party colleague David McIlveen tweeted: "Utterly sickened that a Christian owned business has been hauled over the coals for refusing to promote something that is not legal in NI."//

[Marshwarble]

How can gay marriage be illegal there? We live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in other words it's the same place as the rest of the UK.

[joggerjayne]

I don't know if the laws of England and Wales apply throughout the UK ... not even in Scotland.

[Baldric]

Marshwarbler, read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_Kingdom

[mushroom25]

gay marriage was a devolved issue in the uk - england and wales passed it into law in march last year, and scotland did the same in december 2014. the northern ireland executive have so far declined to enact the legislation.

[Baldric]

Read down to this bit

///Same-sex marriage was legalised in England, Wales and Scotland in 2014,but remains illegal in Northern Ireland where it is recognised as a civil partnership///

[sp1814]

Nice one pastafreak and Psybbo.

Faith restored!

:-)

[Marshwarble]

But a Civil Partnership still deserves a cake?

[mikey4444]

I agree with SP here...

yes, well said Pastafreak and pysbbo...voices of common sense, not bigotry.

[Baldric]

///But a Civil Partnership still deserves a cake?///

You mean one with "Support Gay Marriage" (an illegal act) iced onto it?

[ichkeria]

Bigoted dinosaurs indeed

[mikey4444]

ichkeria...I wholeheartedly agree, but bigots rarely like to be called bigots !

[Ellipsis]

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32065233

On the one side ...

> The Equality Commission said it "raises issues of public importance regarding the extent to which suppliers of goods and services can refuse service on grounds of sexual orientation, religious belief and/or political opinion".

On the other side ...

> However, Ashers said it was "taking a stand" on the grounds of religious freedom. The bakery's stance was backed by the Christian Institute, which has been providing it with legal assistance.

I'm glad that that the "born that way" gays won out over the "chose that way" religious types.

It may take hundreds or thousands of years, but eventually organised religion must either go, get tolerant or wipe us all out. In the meantime we must be tolerant, but never tolerant of intolerance.

[Khandro]

Psybbo;// If I was in business, I'd do what the customer asked//
So you're not in in business it seems, so how do you know? If you are running a business you can do whatever you want with it and for whoever you want. It's your business.

[ludwig]

Unless the bakers would have been prepared to bake the same cake for a heterosexual person (I don't think they would), then the ruling of discrimination is incorrect.

It's simple logic.

[Ellipsis]

"No dogs. No blacks. No Irish." eh, Khandro?

[Zacs-Master]

The case was very simple. The bakery owners were using religion as a basis for discrimination. Anyone who feels this is lawful is as much a bigot as the bakery owners. It's that simple.

[FrogNog]

^^^^this

[ludwig]

// Anyone who feels this is lawful is as much a bigot as the bakery owners. It's that simple. //

Ah, the old 'anyone who disagrees with me must be a bigot' ploy eh Zacs?. Good one.

[Zacs-Master]

No. I'm merely pointing out the straigtforwardness of the case. The bakery used religion as a basis for discrimination. Do you think that's right?

[joggerjayne]

I would be happy if, as a result of cases like this, a precedent was established that ...

Religious beliefs do NOT override the law.

The Courts can't pick and choose, and decide as they go along, which bits of religion CAN override the law, and which bits CAN'T.

Either the law applies to EVERYBODY.

OR religious beliefs override the law.

And, if the law applies to everybody ...

Sikhs do NOT ride motorbikes wearing turbans. They wear a crash helmet.

Jehovah's Witnesses do NOT have the power to overrule a doctor where a blood transfusion will save the life of a minor (if the parent was not a Joho, a child under such threat would be made a Ward of Court).

Sikhs do NOT carry ceremonial knives.

Muslims do NOT enter the UK with underage brides who, by virtue of being under the age of consent, are being raped under English law.

Jews do NOT slaughter animals in a way that is otherwise banned.

Etc.

You can't have a system where Christians have to follow the law, but Sikhs don't, Muslims don't, Johos don't, Jews don't.

Because, if you do, then the whole legal system is discriminating against Christians. And discriminating against Christians, like discriminating against gay people, is illegal.