• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Gay Cakes

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    On Muslims being allowed to refuse to serve alcohol or pork I would say yes if it's a large company and assigning staff to different areas is not a problem, no if its a small company and the company profits would be impacted or other staff would be inconvenienced.

    It is fair enough to cater for people' beliefs provided that they and only they pick up the bill for doing so. It is not up to the rest of us to pay the price for your religious beliefs.
    bloggoth

    If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
    John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

    Comment


      #52
      Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
      My own feeling is that very small companies, shops, B&Bs etc, should be able to make their own decisions on these issues. They are after all just individuals trading in their own right. To impose views on them is probably counterproductive and just raises resentment.
      I mostly agree, but in this case, large companies should also be able to refuse. "Support Gay Marriage" was a political statement. It's not a political debate now in the rest of the UK, since gay marriage is now law and no one is really talking about repealing it. But it was a UK wide debate at the time, and it still is in NI, where there is no gay marriage.

      No company, large or small, should be forced to provide a service to any political campaign of any type. And it is a chilling precedent when a government-funded agency / commission drags someone into court to compel them to provide services to a political campaign and calls it "discrimination."

      Comment


        #53
        Originally posted by WordIsBond View Post
        Nicola won't be pleased you've spilled the beans.

        And I believed everything she says!
        We've been on the road to independence since the 70s and we started planning indyref2 on 19th September. We just haven't told Nicola yet

        Comment


          #54
          Originally posted by WordIsBond View Post
          No company, large or small, should be forced to provide a service to any political campaign of any type. And it is a chilling precedent when a government-funded agency / commission drags someone into court to compel them to provide services to a political campaign and calls it "discrimination."
          The bakery were clearly bigots as they were too incensed to say we don't make cakes with political slogans on them or for political campaigning groups.

          And they would have refused to make a cake more than a couple of times as the campaigning group wouldn't have found out otherwise....
          "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

          Comment


            #55
            Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
            The bakery were clearly bigots
            Presuming this is true, it is completely irrelevant to the point I made. A person or company's motivation for refusing to serve a political campaign is not relevant to the dangers of the precedent.

            Compulsion to political speech is more Stalinist than British.
            Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
            And they would have refused to make a cake more than a couple of times as the campaigning group wouldn't have found out otherwise....
            Is there any evidence for this? If Lee knew they were going to refuse than he is lying. And again, this is irrelevant. It's still a compelled political message, whether they've refused it more than once or not.

            Comment


              #56
              Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
              The bakery were clearly bigots
              big·ot
              ˈbiɡət/
              noun
              a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions



              So you're being quite bigoted yourself
              Originally posted by MaryPoppins
              I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
              Originally posted by vetran
              Urine is quite nourishing

              Comment


                #57
                Originally posted by WordIsBond View Post
                Presuming this is true, it is completely irrelevant to the point I made. A person or company's motivation for refusing to serve a political campaign is not relevant to the dangers of the precedent.

                Compulsion to political speech is more Stalinist than British.

                Is there any evidence for this? If Lee knew they were going to refuse than he is lying. And again, this is irrelevant. It's still a compelled political message, whether they've refused it more than once or not.
                They didn't say that though.

                The reason these people get caught out is because they don't give logical unbigoted reasons for their refusals. Then they get support from some religious normally Christian group who are known for homophobic views.

                Personally I would have made the cake and laughed thinking I would get more of the pink pound but then I'm a capitalist in that respect.
                "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

                Comment


                  #58
                  Originally posted by d000hg View Post
                  big·ot
                  ˈbiɡət/
                  noun
                  a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions



                  So you're being quite bigoted yourself
                  Yep.

                  I don't like people who abuse children or think that 14-17 aren't children in certain matters.

                  I also have an issue with people who blow others up or kill them for political or religious claims.
                  "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

                  Comment


                    #59
                    So these bakery owners were not just opposed to gay marriage, but the lynch-pin of a terrorist pedophile organisation?

                    It's not my fault the word has that definition!
                    Originally posted by MaryPoppins
                    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
                    Originally posted by vetran
                    Urine is quite nourishing

                    Comment


                      #60
                      Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
                      The reason these people get caught out is because they don't give logical unbigoted reasons for their refusals.
                      You are struggling to give logical unbigoted reasons for compelling political speech. As I said, a person's motivations for refusing political speech are not relevant. Just because you think their motivations are bigotry is no sound basis for this.

                      And in fact, religious freedom is also a "logical unbigoted" argument, whether one likes the religious belief or not, or thinks the religious belief itself is bigoted. When religious freedom dies, other freedoms soon follow.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X