Jump to content

ashers bakery


guzzicat
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They (collective for all supporting this daft case) should have respected the bakery staffs right not to be bullied into doing something that they found fundamentally against their religion and beliefs. Glad the judges considered the bakery staffs rights to be equally as important as gay rights.  Could have easily just found another bakery or maybe it was all a deliberate publicity stunt from the off.

And the winners are ............ the legal profession - as always. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been an interesting one to follow - and one that's not split down the expected lines. Plenty of gay activists have come (er...) out in favour of today's ruling because the case has been detracting from genuine homophobia. It's also goes completely against a person's rights to individual beliefs. The ruling stated that the bakery wasn't discriminating against the people as people because of their sexuality, but that they were exercising their right to stand by their own convictions in refusing to put that specific message on the cake.

The right decision, it's just a shame it's taken 4 years to get there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

It's been an interesting one to follow - and one that's not split down the expected lines. Plenty of gay activists have come (er...) out in favour of today's ruling because the case has been detracting from genuine homophobia. It's also goes completely against a person's rights to individual beliefs. The ruling stated that the bakery wasn't discriminating against the people as people because of their sexuality, but that they were exercising their right to stand by their own convictions in refusing to put that specific message on the cake.

The right decision, it's just a shame it's taken 4 years to get there!

Spot on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

I really could not care less, it would have saved everybody a lot of trouble if they had just baked the flippin' cake when they were asked to and not be so judgemental about other people's lives.

You can't demand people to be hypocritical, or force them to go against their privately held beliefs. The bakers' point was that they disagreed with the statement, and they'd have refused to put that on any cake, whether they were heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or even asexual. It was a battle worth fighting so we can all have freedom of beliefs not just those of the left and ultra left. It also allows us to codify what's real discrimination and what's just hot air

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

I really could not care less, it would have saved everybody a lot of trouble if they had just baked the flippin' cake when they were asked to and not be so judgemental about other people's lives.

If you had a T shirt printing business & some antis had wanted to order items with anti field sports message on the front would you have taken the flippin order?

Edited by guzzicat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vince Green said:

I really could not care less, it would have saved everybody a lot of trouble if they had just baked the flippin' cake when they were asked to and not be so judgemental about other people's lives.

How ill informed can you be,,,,,,

the ramifications of this judgement if it hadnt been reversed for any buisness not to have the right to say no to something was huge and would have set a precident where a buisness has to do "whatever" they are asked reguardless...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old fashioned I may be, but I do not believe the state, via legislation, should be able to compel individuals to accept anything at the insistence of another, if they find it personally abhorrent or contrary to their moral/religious standards and/or beliefs!....it won't work anyway, and it won't bring about change or acceptance, it will just cause resentment, perpetuate "hate" and drive the mindset underground! I support individual freedoms but gag at having someone else's opinions/proclivities "forced down my throat"

This decision is hopefully the first sign of a fight back from the majority to the political correctness some minority "activists" are constantly chipping away at society to accept as "normal"

Out of interest....I Wonder who bankrolled the legal costs of the complainant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, guzzicat said:

If you had a T shirt printing business & some antis had wanted to order items with anti field sports message on the front would you have taken the flippin order?

This!

If one of us owned a bakery and someone wanted "Meat eaters are psychopathic killers" iced on it we'd feel within our rights to refuse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, the enigma said:

The right verdict at last. Ashers were deliberately targeted by a bigoted gay rights activist, and the case was then taken up by the Equality Commission. Fair play to Ashers for standing their ground.

+1 peoples freedom of choice should not be put at risk by rabid activists ,it`s time THEY were legislated against to stop this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally the correct decision made to squash this farce. If I go to price a building job and decide for whatever reason that I do not want to do it should the prospective customer be able to take me to court because of my opinions/attitude (bad feeling about it) or should they just go and get another builder? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hambone said:

Totally the correct decision made to squash this farce. If I go to price a building job and decide for whatever reason that I do not want to do it should the prospective customer be able to take me to court because of my opinions/attitude (bad feeling about it) or should they just go and get another builder? 

Exactly ! That`s freedom of choice which you hope for in a democratic society.....oh wait a minute ! ......democracy `s fairly sick too atm.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, guzzicat said:

If you had a T shirt printing business & some antis had wanted to order items with anti field sports message on the front would you have taken the flippin order?

Yes if the alternative would have ended up costing me over £300,000 in legal bills to prove a point nobody cares about,  I can honestly say I would have printed their t shirts, 

But lets just put this whole thing into context, it was two Sesame street characters, not some heavy politically loaded message 

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally as a buisness owner it does matter that they kept going......its gives me the freedom to say no without fear of further action....................so actually if you understand the judges summing up it is a "BIG" point they stood up for and will help many other buisness owners in the future............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...