Supreme Court to Hear Case of Bakery That Refused to Bake Cake for Same Sex Marriage

[caz]

Pat, do we know that the baker was anti-gay? He was anti-gay marriage, but was he anti-gay?

Not sure why there is a distinction, Robert. If he isn't gay himself, and doesn't want to marry one, and it's not against the law where he is baking cakes, what's his problem, and why would he be anti-gay marriage but not anti-gay? And what does 'anti-gay' mean anyway? It's like saying anti-redheads or anti-people with freckles, whether they choose to marry each other or not.

I just don't get why it's anyone's business. It's never going to be compulsory is it, to be gay or to attend a gay wedding as a guest or the blushing bride/groom?

As for the concept of a Christian bakery, I find that odd, but again it's not my business, I just wouldn't buy cakes there because they are meant to be a guilty pleasure, so my prejudice tells me the cakes wouldn't have nearly enough jam, buttercream and cream for my sinful tastes.

Storm in a Devon cream tea cup if you ask me.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

I suppose that we could ask on what other grounds could a shopkeeper or service provider refuse a customer apart from things like being owed money by them or a previous theft or violent behaviour. Someone could say “it was their business they could refuse anyone they wanted to,” but we could still ask what other grounds are acceptable for refusal. Should discrimination on religious grounds be an exception? Is it much different from someone saying “my lifelong beliefs tell me that a white man shouldnt marry a black woman or vise versa?” Of course, in legal terms, there are discrimination laws to prevent this but should religion provide immunity from this? Would they really have been ‘condoning’ the marriage by simply providing a cake?
Im glad that they can afford to turn down the custom. Seems petty to me.

[Robert]

Well I'm for freedom when it comes to shopkeepers deciding whom they will serve.

It's different when it comes to local or national government, where people should all be treated the same.

I'm a bit mystified as to why gays should want to force a bloke to make them a cake when he doesn't want to. For a start, the cake might turn out to be not terribly good.

I'm not a Christian. If I took leave of my senses and arranged to get married, I would not expect a keen Christian baker to do a cake showing the bride, and me, and Friedrich Nietzsche standing there as the best man. Nor would I expect a Moslem baker to show the bride and groom with a bottle of champagne. I would happily settle for the bride and groom and a pot of tea, since I'm teetotal.

[Steadmund Brand]

I sickens me that religion is an excuse for hatred and intolerance...nothing says hypocrisy like hating someone in the name of god for being how god made them....and this "religious freedom" BS we have... basically saying... you have the right to discriminate.. but only if you are a Christian who wants to....so... when will they be allowed to stone children to death..based on religious freedom... or sell their daughters into slavery... or beat their slaves....or oh forget it....their cake probably sucks anyway (no pun intended)

Steadmund Brand

[caz]

I suppose that we could ask on what other grounds could a shopkeeper or service provider refuse a customer apart from things like being owed money by them or a previous theft or violent behaviour. Someone could say “it was their business they could refuse anyone they wanted to,” but we could still ask what other grounds are acceptable for refusal. Should discrimination on religious grounds be an exception? Is it much different from someone saying “my lifelong beliefs tell me that a white man shouldnt marry a black woman or vise versa?” Of course, in legal terms, there are discrimination laws to prevent this but should religion provide immunity from this? Would they really have been ‘condoning’ the marriage by simply providing a cake?
Im glad that they can afford to turn down the custom. Seems petty to me.

Hi HS,

I was thinking along the same lines. Alienating all potential customers from the gay community, plus all those who dislike the holier than thou attitude taken by a so-called "love thy neighbour/do as you would be done by" Christian, doesn't seem to make much business sense, unless it's more about prophets than profits.

Maybe there'll be a flood of bigots queuing up for flour-based products to replace the lost custom.

"If I knew you were coming [in the conventional man and wife sense] I'd have baked you a cake. Otherwise you can get screwed, you perverts."

Must set that to music one day. For the church organ.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Well I'm for freedom when it comes to shopkeepers deciding whom they will serve.

It's different when it comes to local or national government, where people should all be treated the same.

I'm a bit mystified as to why gays should want to force a bloke to make them a cake when he doesn't want to. For a start, the cake might turn out to be not terribly good.

I'm not a Christian. If I took leave of my senses and arranged to get married, I would not expect a keen Christian baker to do a cake showing the bride, and me, and Friedrich Nietzsche standing there as the best man. Nor would I expect a Moslem baker to show the bride and groom with a bottle of champagne. I would happily settle for the bride and groom and a pot of tea, since I'm teetotal.

But what if all the tea suppliers decided it was against their religion or personal morals to sell their products to anyone called Robert, Robert? What if they believed the law allowing the Roberts of this world to drink tea or get married was wrong?

How would you feel if you were behind someone in a shop, who was refused service because that person was Jewish, or black, or French, or only had one leg? What if you were refused service because of who you are? What if every shop began adopting this policy, so you, or whichever other members of the human race were being discriminated against, couldn't get service anywhere?

Yes, I know it's never going to happen, but isn't that lucky for you, me and all the one-legged black, Jewish, French people in this world?

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

If every religious businessman decided to have no dealings with anyone that he or she saw as someone ‘breaking god’s law’ and therefore a sinner then there would be very few successful religious businessmen. No business with unmarried couples, or divorcees or anyone that has had an abortion. Making a specific example of a gay couple appears to show that they have a higher level of contempt for them than other types of sinners. Would anyone really feel that by baking a cake for someone you are somehow condoning certain lifestyle choices? Would any thinking religious person really believe that god might punish them for providing a cake for a gay wedding?
Every businessman or woman has the right to refuse business. If it because of something that youve previously done, been abusive in the shop, stolen something, left bills unpaid then id say that that was fair play but by refusing on grounds of ‘what’ you are then i think that we are on sticky ground. How far is this from being able to say “ i refuse to serve these people because my deeply held principles tell me that black people should be segregated from white people.” Im an atheist but i understand that peoples religious beliefs are important to them. A bit of tolerance never goes amiss though in a world where we are trying to live together with all of our differences. And come on.......its a cake for christ’s sake

[Robert]

Caz, if I were in a shop that refused to sell me tea, I'd go without. What do you expect me to do - rob the shop?

If I were behind the other people you mention, and they were refused service, I would probably walk out.

Vital matters such as education and health care fall into the public side and I have already dealt with that.

Obviously if there were some kind of mass boycott so that people couldn't get food or whatever, the government would have to introduce a law dealing with it as there would be a danger to life and limb.

Of course, the gay people concerned could have found countless shops, Christian and otherwise, to make them a cake. It's worth noting that they would probably have had the same disappointment if they visited enough Moslem bakers.

Re bigotry, when it comes to morality then we are all bigots. There is not the slightest rational justification for any ethical statement. Those who say things we like, we call principled. Those who say things we dislike, we call prejudiced. Our beliefs are based on custom, personal taste, self-interest, emotion, or any one of a thousand other things. But not on reason - it doesn't apply.

[caz]

I'm a bit mystified as to why gays should want to force a bloke to make them a cake when he doesn't want to. For a start, the cake might turn out to be not terribly good.

Isn't it exactly the same argument as asking why black people should want to force a white mini cab driver to take them anywhere when he doesn't want to, because he has firmly believed since childhood that they should all "go back to where they came from"? His driving might turn out to be even worse and more dangerous than his incessant political rants, but it's the principle that matters, surely?

Is gay really the new black, or have I just stepped back to the 1980s??

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert]

Caz, in the example you mention - people having to dial for a second minicab or, much worse, people travelling a couple of hundred miles to a holiday hotel only to be refused entry - then the Trades Descriptions Act, or whatever it's called now, should be applied - the owner's restrictions should be prominently displayed in the advertising. What I'm saying is, if someone wants to damage or ruin his business, then it's nobody's affair but his.

Is this to be applied to customers too? If a policeman overhears someone saying "I won't shop in there because they're Scottish," then is the customer to be forced to buy something?

[caz]

Caz, if I were in a shop that refused to sell me tea, I'd go without. What do you expect me to do - rob the shop?

Of course not, but I'd expect you to call them loonies if they said it was because they believed it was wrong to be a Robert, and especially wrong to let a Robert buy tea.

And if more and more shops adopted this same policy, I'd expect you to kick up a bit of a stink about it before meekly changing your name to Christer - and finding you couldn't buy fish and chips either.

If I were behind the other people you mention, and they were refused service, I would probably walk out.

So would you walk out if it was a gay couple wearing matching wedding rings being refused service?

Of course, the gay people concerned could have found countless shops, Christian and otherwise, to make them a cake. It's worth noting that they would probably have had the same disappointment if they visited enough Moslem bakers.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Or should that be two wrong gays don't make a Mr and Mr Right?

Re bigotry, when it comes to morality then we are all bigots. There is not the slightest rational justification for any ethical statement. Those who say things we like, we call principled. Those who say things we dislike, we call prejudiced. Our beliefs are based on custom, personal taste, self-interest, emotion, or any one of a thousand other things. But not on reason - it doesn't apply.

But the law of the land applies - or should.

So if the law says gay couples have the same right to marry as straight couples and not be unfairly discriminated against when they choose to do so, why would anyone seek to deprive them of a poxy wedding cake, let alone fear divine retribution if they supplied one? All too often it seems that religion is used as a convenient excuse to hide behind, by people who want to practise their personal brand of bigotry more easily.

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert]

"So would you walk out if it was a gay couple wearing matching wedding rings being refused service?"

Yes probably.

"But the law of the land applies - or should."

Of course, but the question is, which laws are good ones and which ones bad? I believe that when it comes to public matters, everyone should be treated the same - so gays should be allowed to be married. On the other hand, I disagree with someone being forced to make them a cake. And the reasons for their refusal are none of my business. But if it makes you any happier, Caz, I can say that if I were a baker I would make them a cake, because I have no animosity towards gays.

[GUT]

But the law of the land applies - or should.


Love,

Caz
X

And the law of the land is what the Supreme Court or Congress says it is. And they have said it was ok for him to deny service.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Its perhaps a shame that in the worlds first secular democracy religion still gets afforded special priviledges though. You cant discriminate unless its on religious grounds.

[Robert]

Well Michael, I think gays should be able to discriminate against Christians if they want. You surely don't want a society where everyone has to think the same, act the same, and anyone who doesn't is subjected to an inquisition as to his motives?