Christian Bakery vs Queerspace

Author
Discussion

Andehh

Original Poster:

7,110 posts

206 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
From the BBC.....

[b] Christian-run bakery that refused a customer's request to make a cake with a slogan supporting gay marriage rights could face legal action.

Ashers Baking Company declined an order from a gay rights activist, asking for cake featuring the Sesame Street puppets, Bert and Ernie.

The customer also wanted the cake to feature the logo of a Belfast-based campaign group called "Queerspace".

The County Antrim firm could face legal action from the Equality Commission.

The watchdog confirmed it is assisting the customer whose order was refused and has written to the baking company on his behalf.

Christian beliefs

The bakery, which was founded in Newtownabbey in 1992, is run by the McArthur family.

The directors, who are Christians, run six shops in Northern Ireland and employ 62 people.

The firm's 24-year-old general manager, Daniel McArthur, said the customer placed the order in their Belfast branch a number of weeks ago, and it was then passed to their head office.


The firm's general manager, Daniel McArthur, recorded a statement which the Christian Institute posted online
In an online statement, Mr McArthur said: "The directors and myself looked at it and considered it and thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs.

"It certainly was at odds with what the Bible teaches, and on the following Monday we rang the customer to let him know that we couldn't take his order."

'Discriminated'

Mr MrArthur added that his firm offered the customer a full refund, which was collected shortly after the order was refused.

"We thought that was the end of it, but approximately six weeks later we received a letter from the Equality Commission. The Equality Commission's letter said that we had discriminated against the customer on the grounds of his sexual orientation.


Northern Ireland is now the only part of the UK which has not passed a law to introduce same-sex marriage
"It asked us to propose how we would recompense the customer for this discrimination. It also said it would pursue legal proceedings if we didn't respond within a seven-day time period," Mr McArthur said.

Legal assistance

The general manager said he was "very surprised" by the watchdog's letter and his firm asked the Christian Institute for advice on how to deal with the case.

The institute is supporting the bakery's stance and is now providing legal assistance.

Mr McArthur said: "I feel if we don't take a stand on this here case, then how can we stand up against it, further down the line?"

The general manager added that it was not the first time his company had refused customers' cake orders.

"In the past, we've declined several orders which have contained pornographic images and offensive, foul language."

Mr McArthur added: "I would like the outcome of this to be that, any Christians running a business could be allowed to follow their Christian beliefs and principles in the day-to-day running of their business and that they are allowed to make decisions based on that."

In a statement, the watchdog said: "The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland provides advice and can provide assistance to people who complain to us that they have suffered unlawful discrimination.

"In this case the commission has granted assistance to the complainant, and has written to the company concerned on his behalf.

"The commission will consider any response before taking further action."

Northern Ireland is now the only part of the UK which has not passed a law to introduce same-sex marriage.[/b]

When someone is gay and bring actively discriminated against in the form of abuse, or people going out of their way to get at them then obviously it's not on and the law needs to step in and punish accordingly. However, when a small local business which prides itself as a small Christian business stands by their beliefs and turns away customers politely and respectfully then I support someone being entitled to walk what they talk... Even if in their shoes I'd be grateful for the custom.

Additionally is this Queerspace stumbling across this business by coincidence, or actively seeking to make a few headlines with a low blow?


Edit; Damn itallics/bold not working.



Edited by Andehh on Tuesday 8th July 10:37

mondeoman

11,430 posts

266 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
What happens when a Muslim refuses to serve alcohol because its against their religion? Same thing should apply here, all else being equal. Personally I don't agree with their stance, but if religious rules are allowed to apply to one religion, then they should be applied equally to all others...

Tunku

7,703 posts

228 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
If I don't want someone's business for whatever reason, why should I then be forced to take it?

shirt

22,550 posts

201 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
bit of an own goal there, they could have simply refused on grounds of copyright infringement on sesame street and the queerspace logo.

storm in a teacup, i despair.

Mr_B

10,480 posts

243 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
More importantly , what the hell are they trying to say about Bert and Ernie ??

paranoid airbag

2,679 posts

159 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
mondeoman said:
Personally I don't agree with their stance, but if religious rules are allowed to apply to one religion, then they should be applied equally to all others...
+1 I don't agree either, but bringing the law against someone's sincerely held beliefs makes me feel queasy. Okay, there have to be limits - it is not acceptable to actively harm others based on your beliefs.

I can see from the other side too - walking through a town to find every B&B has "no dogs, no blacks, no irish" on it must suck. I guess if we have to have one rule, what we've chosen now is the best compromise - you can still protest, but leave it out of business - but it can still feel oppressive at times.

Edited by paranoid airbag on Tuesday 8th July 11:09

Regiment

2,799 posts

159 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
So an organisation "Queerspace" is fighting for their rights to marry whomever they please by taking away the rights of another organisation "the bakery" to serve whomever they please. I fully support gay marriage but find Queerspace to be purely acting in a completely hypocritical manner and the bakery should be protected. The bakery, an independent business, should be allowed to refuse custom if it goes against their rights. All that should have happened is that Queerspace take their business and money to a competitor and support the competitor...simple, free, open market.

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
The time for moaning about their 'sincerely held beliefs' was before the laws were passed that made practising some of those beliefs illegal.

Their best guess of what god reckons doesn't trump the law of the land.

God had his chance to strike down the legislators and, for presumably good reasons, he chose not to. Who are we to question that?

Now, just put up and shut up.


SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
Regiment said:
So an organisation "Queerspace" is fighting for their rights to marry whomever they please by taking away the rights of another organisation "the bakery" to serve whomever they please. I fully support gay marriage but find Queerspace to be purely acting in a completely hypocritical manner and the bakery should be protected. The bakery, an independent business, should be allowed to refuse custom if it goes against their rights. All that should have happened is that Queerspace take their business and money to a competitor and support the competitor...simple, free, open market.
You're arguing a false premise.

They don't have the right to refuse to serve someone for this reason. That's exactly what this law is about.

Lost soul

8,712 posts

182 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
Regiment said:
So an organisation "Queerspace" is fighting for their rights to marry whomever they please by taking away the rights of another organisation "the bakery" to serve whomever they please.
do you think it is just by chance that this bakery was chosen to bake the cake wink

Regiment

2,799 posts

159 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
You're arguing a false premise.

They don't have the right to refuse to serve someone for this reason. That's exactly what this law is about.
It's a law I completely disagree with, the bakery has in no way stopped the gay organisation from buying a cake, they've just stopped them from buying a cake from them. There are quite a few gays, lesbians and bisexuals about, I'm sure another local bakery would be very happy to serve them and meet their needs thus losing the original bakery run by the Christians business.

It just stinks of hypocrisy to me, you've forced your opinion on me for 2000 years so now I'm going to force my opinion on you and force you to make me a cake you find inappropriate.

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
paranoid airbag said:
mondeoman said:
Personally I don't agree with their stance, but if religious rules are allowed to apply to one religion, then they should be applied equally to all others...
+1 I don't agree either, but bringing the law against someone's sincerely held beliefs makes me feel queasy. Okay, there have to be limits - it is not acceptable to actively harm others based on your beliefs.

I can see from the other side too - walking through a town to find every B&B has "no dogs, no blacks, no irish" on it must suck. I guess if we have to have one rule, what we've chosen now is the best compromise - you can still protest, but leave it out of business - but it can still feel oppressive at times.

Edited by paranoid airbag on Tuesday 8th July 11:09
Can you tell me there's a relevant distinction between 'White Supremacy' and 'Straight Supremacy'?

To the extent of setting one's professional cake-making policy to support one but not the other?

paranoid airbag

2,679 posts

159 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
Regiment said:
So an organisation "Queerspace" is fighting for their rights to marry whomever they please by taking away the rights of another organisation "the bakery" to serve whomever they please. I fully support gay marriage but find Queerspace to be purely acting in a completely hypocritical manner and the bakery should be protected. The bakery, an independent business, should be allowed to refuse custom if it goes against their rights. All that should have happened is that Queerspace take their business and money to a competitor and support the competitor...simple, free, open market.
You're arguing a false premise.

They don't have the right to refuse to serve someone for this reason. That's exactly what this law is about.
I wonder - would it be okay for every bakery in a thirty mile radius to refuse them service, as is their right?

OTOH I can see a potential for distinction between serving you based on what you are - I'm okay with that always being illegal - and limiting the types of services you provide. Could a straight person order a queerspace cake from this shop? If not, then it isn't discrimination.

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
Regiment said:
SpeckledJim said:
You're arguing a false premise.

They don't have the right to refuse to serve someone for this reason. That's exactly what this law is about.
It's a law I completely disagree with, the bakery has in no way stopped the gay organisation from buying a cake, they've just stopped them from buying a cake from them. There are quite a few gays, lesbians and bisexuals about, I'm sure another local bakery would be very happy to serve them and meet their needs thus losing the original bakery run by the Christians business.

It just stinks of hypocrisy to me, you've forced your opinion on me for 2000 years so now I'm going to force my opinion on you and force you to make me a cake you find inappropriate.
The ship has sailed. The law was debated for a LOOOONG time and we decided, on balance, that protecting discrimination was worse than upsetting those who would prefer to discriminate.

You may, of course, lobby for a change in the law, or consider moving to a more discriminatory society (which I'm proud to suggest is almost all of them, so there's plenty of choice).

The cake-makers are professionals. Suck it up and do your job. Presumably they make cakes supporting football teams they don't like? This is more serious than that? Really? It's a sodding cake.

See also: B&B proprietors.

Thorodin

2,459 posts

133 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
What a stupid mess such activists manage to contrive. How much benefit do they think they do their cause by stirring trouble and conflict? It should also be noted that this latest aggravation takes place in a climate and location that is extremely (pun intended) conscious about religious factions and self expression. Maybe the tables should be turned and the protestors arrested for incitement to terror amongst the 'religious divide' - it could be seen as just as valid.

Whatever their assumed objective they should be made aware that by far the greater majority couldn't give a stuff about their sexuality, that they are fighting an imaginary foe, and that a quiet education by traditional means will produce a more lasting victory in social mores than threats. They should grow up and stop waving their badge of sexuality in everyone's faces.

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
paranoid airbag said:
SpeckledJim said:
Regiment said:
So an organisation "Queerspace" is fighting for their rights to marry whomever they please by taking away the rights of another organisation "the bakery" to serve whomever they please. I fully support gay marriage but find Queerspace to be purely acting in a completely hypocritical manner and the bakery should be protected. The bakery, an independent business, should be allowed to refuse custom if it goes against their rights. All that should have happened is that Queerspace take their business and money to a competitor and support the competitor...simple, free, open market.
You're arguing a false premise.

They don't have the right to refuse to serve someone for this reason. That's exactly what this law is about.
I wonder - would it be okay for every bakery in a thirty mile radius to refuse them service, as is their right?

OTOH I can see a potential for distinction between serving you based on what you are - I'm okay with that always being illegal - and limiting the types of services you provide. Could a straight person order a queerspace cake from this shop? If not, then it isn't discrimination.
"I don't care if you're gay or straight, we don't make 'gay cakes'"

is still not on, when they willingly make 'straight cakes'.

paranoid airbag

2,679 posts

159 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
paranoid airbag said:
mondeoman said:
Personally I don't agree with their stance, but if religious rules are allowed to apply to one religion, then they should be applied equally to all others...
+1 I don't agree either, but bringing the law against someone's sincerely held beliefs makes me feel queasy. Okay, there have to be limits - it is not acceptable to actively harm others based on your beliefs.

I can see from the other side too - walking through a town to find every B&B has "no dogs, no blacks, no irish" on it must suck. I guess if we have to have one rule, what we've chosen now is the best compromise - you can still protest, but leave it out of business - but it can still feel oppressive at times.

Edited by paranoid airbag on Tuesday 8th July 11:09
Can you tell me there's a relevant distinction between 'White Supremacy' and 'Straight Supremacy'?

To the extent of setting one's professional cake-making policy to support one but not the other?
Good question, that I believe I've half answered. No, there is not a relevant distinction here.

If the bakery refused to serve black customers, that would deservedly come under discimination laws.

If the bakery refused to bake a black supremacist or racial equality cake, but would bake a white supremacist cake, then (assuming the white supremacist cake is not in itself illegal under racial hatred laws), I would be okay with that. Not happy, but I wouldn't call that discrimination deserving of legal action so long as that restriction was applied to all customers alike.

SpeckledJim said:
"I don't care if you're gay or straight, we don't make 'gay cakes'"

is still not on, when they willingly make 'straight cakes'.
We seem to understand each other and will probably not agree on this, so I'll leave it here. "Not on" maybe, but making that illegal goes too far for me. The state can tell you who to give your custom to, and that's fair, but this is sate telling you what that custom should be, and that is not appropriate here.

The customers might have a false advertising claim of course, if the business advertised "any message you want". Fair enough, and they get what they were possibly looking for - to have the bakery's beliefs out in the open. Again, fair.

Edited by paranoid airbag on Tuesday 8th July 11:39

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

253 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
paranoid airbag said:
SpeckledJim said:
paranoid airbag said:
mondeoman said:
Personally I don't agree with their stance, but if religious rules are allowed to apply to one religion, then they should be applied equally to all others...
+1 I don't agree either, but bringing the law against someone's sincerely held beliefs makes me feel queasy. Okay, there have to be limits - it is not acceptable to actively harm others based on your beliefs.

I can see from the other side too - walking through a town to find every B&B has "no dogs, no blacks, no irish" on it must suck. I guess if we have to have one rule, what we've chosen now is the best compromise - you can still protest, but leave it out of business - but it can still feel oppressive at times.

Edited by paranoid airbag on Tuesday 8th July 11:09
Can you tell me there's a relevant distinction between 'White Supremacy' and 'Straight Supremacy'?

To the extent of setting one's professional cake-making policy to support one but not the other?
Good question, that I believe I've half answered. No, there is not a relevant distinction here.

If the bakery refused to serve black customers, that would deservedly come under discimination laws.

If the bakery refused to bake a black supremacist or racial equality cake, but would bake a white supremacist cake, then (assuming the white supremacist cake is not in itself illegal under racial hatred laws), I would be okay with that. Not happy, but I wouldn't call that discrimination deserving of legal action so long as that restriction was applied to all customers alike.
But the legislation has headed that off.

If there's no difference between an 'Adam And Eve - 10 years of Love' cake and an 'Adam and Steve - 10 years of Love' cake, you aren't allowed to refuse an order for the latter, if you'll willingly produce the former.

The bit that baffles me isn't the nuts and bolts of the law, it's the mindset of this business, who know they're being tested, know they'll cause a kerfuffle if they refuse the order, know that society on the whole won't support them, yet still take a stand.

It isn't a hobby, this is their livelihood.

After all, they may prefer to be seen, extremely publicly, as homophobic than quietly just make a cake they disagree with, but just by living here, paying tax to a non-homophobic government, they are compromising their principles.

"I won't make an Adam and Steve cake, but I'll pay tax to people who tell me I must, and (presumably) vote for parties who think I'm a bigot."

(there's the word - the homophobe's hand-grenade! smile)

Bisonhead

1,568 posts

189 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
Is it just me that thinks 'Its a fking cake, go elsewhere'. How many cake shops are there in Belfast?

Nothing against gays OR fundamentalists....find a workaround and get on with your life with knowledge that some people dont like others due to close mindedness and stupidity.

People are so easily hurt nowadays

Jasandjules

69,883 posts

229 months

Tuesday 8th July 2014
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
Their best guess of what god reckons doesn't trump the law of the land.
Are you quite sure? You see, there are a number of situations where it does appear to. Indeed, look no further than the parking issue in SP&L.