The Big Gay Cake

[Russ]

Who?

Cake wench

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Very pregnant looking at present

Heathen

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Amy McArthur is her name. She's alright

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Spit roast?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Dave]

I view this as an over the top response to an over the top response. Why doesn't someone make them a bloody cake and move the feck on! I hate that stuff like this makes the news, and feckin curry my yoghurt, meanwhile the ravaging cuts proposed for the health service are attributed very few feckage.

I understand that there isn't much appetite to discuss anything to do with religion on this board. As Snipe says, we won't reach a consensus, not that that is a reason not to debate something. The problem is, having been on differing sides on the religion debate, that neither side can prove/disprove the premise, i.e. belief in a supernatural God, who is invisible and has no physical presence or at least displays none. That remains completely untestable.

Refusing to make someone a cake on basis that the message on it goes against their religious views is absurd, in my opinion. The biblical argument against same sex relationships is fairly weak, with many starting to believe it be an erroneous interpretation of the scripture. Many of course remain faithful to the teachings of Jesus, he was an outstanding Rabbi, he is reported to have made multiple references to not judging others. So even if you believe something to be wrong or sinful, judging them is not permitted, so Christians should in my view, allow people to live their own lives on their own terms and no one should be subjected to the emotional guilt ridden diatribe that is commonplace in this part of the World.

I'd be right with you Dave if I didn't suspect the person ordering the gay cake wasn't deliberately setting out to antagonise.
Those types I have no time for.
Its a bit like if a Christian went into a Muslim bakers and ordered a twin towers memorial cake.
Only then most people no doubt would be on the side of the cake makers.
I'm sure that points been made to death in the 62 previous pages of this thread that I can't be bothered reading.

Quite right on one count though Dave, if I'm discussing the principles of imaginary Muslim cake making scenarios on a rugby web site I've way too much time on my hands.

Anyway for those who still give a feck here's what renown Gay activist Peter Tatchell thinks
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&sourc ... 9H&ampcf=1

Not sure Liz, apparently the chap in question was a regular customer.

Anyway, they just refused to put 'top shagger' on a cake for me so I'm off to KRW to tear them a new a-hole.

Fair dos Dave but I initally thought the gay marriage cake would be a normal wedding cake and put two geezers on top which I thought was a fuss about nothing.
However on viewing the actual cake to be made I found it was far more inflammatory and he must have known it would antagonise particularly if he was a regular and knew the position it would put the bakers in.

Or I could have this entirely wrong and he isn't the sort of person who seems to be loving the attention and gloating in the aftermath having put a regular family just wanting to get on with their lives through a living hell.
No one would do that though would they?

Making assumptions about the motives of either party is a fairly meaningless excercise. It's better to discuss the merits of the case. I've done this ad nauseam and I don't care anymore.

[Russ]

Im still confused by this case
Can someone explain to me why a bakery is allowed to use copyrighted imagery

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Dave]

Im still confused by this case
Can someone explain to me why a bakery is allowed to use copyrighted imagery

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

You can just eat the evidence

[Liz Fraser]

I view this as an over the top response to an over the top response. Why doesn't someone make them a bloody cake and move the feck on! I hate that stuff like this makes the news, and feckin curry my yoghurt, meanwhile the ravaging cuts proposed for the health service are attributed very few feckage.

I understand that there isn't much appetite to discuss anything to do with religion on this board. As Snipe says, we won't reach a consensus, not that that is a reason not to debate something. The problem is, having been on differing sides on the religion debate, that neither side can prove/disprove the premise, i.e. belief in a supernatural God, who is invisible and has no physical presence or at least displays none. That remains completely untestable.

Refusing to make someone a cake on basis that the message on it goes against their religious views is absurd, in my opinion. The biblical argument against same sex relationships is fairly weak, with many starting to believe it be an erroneous interpretation of the scripture. Many of course remain faithful to the teachings of Jesus, he was an outstanding Rabbi, he is reported to have made multiple references to not judging others. So even if you believe something to be wrong or sinful, judging them is not permitted, so Christians should in my view, allow people to live their own lives on their own terms and no one should be subjected to the emotional guilt ridden diatribe that is commonplace in this part of the World.

I'd be right with you Dave if I didn't suspect the person ordering the gay cake wasn't deliberately setting out to antagonise.
Those types I have no time for.
Its a bit like if a Christian went into a Muslim bakers and ordered a twin towers memorial cake.
Only then most people no doubt would be on the side of the cake makers.
I'm sure that points been made to death in the 62 previous pages of this thread that I can't be bothered reading.

Quite right on one count though Dave, if I'm discussing the principles of imaginary Muslim cake making scenarios on a rugby web site I've way too much time on my hands.

Anyway for those who still give a feck here's what renown Gay activist Peter Tatchell thinks
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&sourc ... 9H&ampcf=1

Not sure Liz, apparently the chap in question was a regular customer.

Anyway, they just refused to put 'top shagger' on a cake for me so I'm off to KRW to tear them a new a-hole.

Fair dos Dave but I initally thought the gay marriage cake would be a normal wedding cake and put two geezers on top which I thought was a fuss about nothing.
However on viewing the actual cake to be made I found it was far more inflammatory and he must have known it would antagonise particularly if he was a regular and knew the position it would put the bakers in.

Or I could have this entirely wrong and he isn't the sort of person who seems to be loving the attention and gloating in the aftermath having put a regular family just wanting to get on with their lives through a living hell.
No one would do that though would they?

Making assumptions about the motives of either party is a fairly meaningless excercise. It's better to discuss the merits of the case. I've done this ad nauseam and I don't care anymore.

Im off to get drunk now

[jean valjean]

I'm a little confused about this one as it all comes down to what is being asked for.
If it was a wedding cake for a gay couple then the refusal would be discriminatory. The message was for a campaign and in this case I feel businesses have a right to not endorse a campaign, which by providing the service they are tacitly doing.This does not mean a b&b should be able to refuse a gay couple a double room. There is a difference. I understand the service provision argument but i wouldn't want a gay baker to have to ice a cake with "support traditional marriage".

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[BR]

I'm a little confused about this one as it all comes down to what is being asked for.
If it was a wedding cake for a gay couple then the refusal would be discriminatory. The message was for a campaign and in this case I feel businesses have a right to not endorse a campaign, which by providing the service they are tacitly doing.This does not mean a b&b should be able to refuse a gay couple a double room. There is a difference. I understand the service provision argument but i wouldn't want a gay baker to have to ice a cake with "support traditional marriage".

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The problem is that 'Support Gay Marriage' is a political statement. Anti-discrimination laws in NI apply to political beliefs. Had this happened in Dublin or London, for example, where political beliefs are not covered, then the bakery could have simply refused.

[jean valjean]

I'm a little confused about this one as it all comes down to what is being asked for.
If it was a wedding cake for a gay couple then the refusal would be discriminatory. The message was for a campaign and in this case I feel businesses have a right to not endorse a campaign, which by providing the service they are tacitly doing.This does not mean a b&b should be able to refuse a gay couple a double room. There is a difference. I understand the service provision argument but i wouldn't want a gay baker to have to ice a cake with "support traditional marriage".

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The problem is that 'Support Gay Marriage' is a political statement. Anti-discrimination laws in NI apply to political beliefs. Had this happened in Dublin or London, for example, where political beliefs are not covered, then the bakery could have simply refused.

Was the case not taken with regards the clients sexuality rather than political persuasion?

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

[BR]

I'm a little confused about this one as it all comes down to what is being asked for.
If it was a wedding cake for a gay couple then the refusal would be discriminatory. The message was for a campaign and in this case I feel businesses have a right to not endorse a campaign, which by providing the service they are tacitly doing.This does not mean a b&b should be able to refuse a gay couple a double room. There is a difference. I understand the service provision argument but i wouldn't want a gay baker to have to ice a cake with "support traditional marriage".

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The problem is that 'Support Gay Marriage' is a political statement. Anti-discrimination laws in NI apply to political beliefs. Had this happened in Dublin or London, for example, where political beliefs are not covered, then the bakery could have simply refused.

Was the case not taken with regards the clients sexuality rather than political persuasion?

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

AFAIK both. The high court held that one led to the other.

The defence did not help themselves in this regard.

The HC gave an explanation that because the political campaign was to demand a change in the law which would not directly effect most people of one particular sexuality then the campaign was in itself a campaign about sexuality. I will leave you to decide if you agree.

I would expect the Supreme court to clarify.

[Shan]

I wonder if I asked a baker in Belfast to bake a cake and add the message "I support the IRFU" would they just do their job or have a big UAFC-Style whingefest.

[BR]

I wonder if I asked a baker in Belfast to bake a cake and add the message "I support the IRFU" would they just do their job or have a big UAFC-Style whingefest.

I'm fairly sure that is covered in the clauses dealing with obscenity.

[Dave]

I'd still eat it

[big mervyn]

Is that bint permanently pregnant?

[Russ]

Is that bint permanently pregnant?

Tactics

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Liz Fraser]

I'd still eat it

I'd eat it and send a strongly worded letter to the bakers to let them know I'm not happy with their actions but will continue to be a regular customer in the future regardless.