Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Discuss, debate and exchange opinions on issues that are of a serious nature.

TOPIC: Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083520

  • Vegemite Kid
  • Vegemite Kid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 10399
  • Well said received: 11428
  • Points: 214479
  • Honor Medal 2010
Well, yes, the bakers did find something to be aggrieved about. :unsure:

Of course it is easy to just dismiss discrimination as people finding something to be aggrieved about if you are not the one being discriminated against.
Something people say from ivory towers.
The following user(s) said Well Said: Annette

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083523

  • Robin
  • Robin's Avatar
  • Away
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 1046
  • Well said received: 1038
  • Points: 125344
  • Honor Medal 2010

Vegemite Kid wrote: As Kaygee pointed out, no, they don't have the right to refuse to serve anyone - discrimination by refusing to serve a gay person would still be illegal.
So if they did that and it went to the high court, it wouldn't be the same ,morganman.


You see signs "We have the right to refuse service", "No shirt, No shoes, No service", "No Tie, No Jacket, No service". If I don't want to sale you my livestock that is for sale, I don't have to. If I don't want your money, I don't have to take it. If its a government business, ok. That's tax payers money. But not a private business.
The following user(s) said Well Said: Serena77

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083545

  • photogeek
  • photogeek's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 5331
  • Well said received: 5819
  • Points: 65384
  • Honor Medal 2010

senile1 wrote: It opens the door to refusal of anybody purely for ideological / philosophical reasons B) As I have said many times on when this subject has come up, you're in business to make money, and whom so ever shall seek your services, you are obliged to provide the very best service possible, or you should get out of business B) I am not interested in doing business with anyone who discriminates against others B)


...but in you refusing to do business with such a person, are you yourself then not discriminating?
The following user(s) said Well Said: Annnie, Tachyon

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083548

  • Rain
  • Rain's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Posts: 392
  • Well said received: 1429
  • Points: 109191
  • Honor Medal 2010
It's 20 years tomorrow since Matthew Shepard died.

He was a 21 year old student from Wyoming. He was a gentle person of slight build and small stature. He was driven to a remote area by two men, beaten, tortured, tied to a fence and left to die. Matthew was killed because he was gay.

The singer Melissa Etheridge wrote a song called Sacrecrow about this crime, so called because the cyclist who found him thought he was a scarecrow at first.

You might not think this has much to do with the law saying it is alright to refuse baking a cake. But it does.

If the law gives out the message that gay people are inferior and are LESSER than everybody else it's telling people it's okay to treat gay people badly.

If you see someone being refused service in a shop because of their sexuality, it says to you it's okay to look down on them. It says it's okay to treat them differently. It says they are not equal to you.

What next?

Is it okay to call them names?

Is it okay to hit them?

Is it okay to kill them?

A proportion of people are gay. This has been known for a long, long time. It's high time society got over this fact and took a mature attitude that we are all unique and have our differences.

We are tall, we are short, we are dark, we are fair. Blue eyed, brown eyed. And yes; some of us are gay.

Shame on that judge who made this decision. He set society back into the dark days again and gave cart blanche to the gay bashers.

Remembering Matthew Shepard today and all those who weren't just refused service, they were refused the right to be treated as human...

Attachments:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083553

  • Vegemite Kid
  • Vegemite Kid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 10399
  • Well said received: 11428
  • Points: 214479
  • Honor Medal 2010

Robin wrote:

Vegemite Kid wrote: As Kaygee pointed out, no, they don't have the right to refuse to serve anyone - discrimination by refusing to serve a gay person would still be illegal.
So if they did that and it went to the high court, it wouldn't be the same ,morganman.


You see signs "We have the right to refuse service", "No shirt, No shoes, No service", "No Tie, No Jacket, No service". If I don't want to sale you my livestock that is for sale, I don't have to. If I don't want your money, I don't have to take it. If its a government business, ok. That's tax payers money. But not a private business.



I don't know where you live - but that is not the case here in Australia - it is not ok to refuse to do business or in any other way to discriminate on grounds of race, sexuality, gender, disability, religion.
It is illegal to do so.

Things like dress code - ie no shoes, no shirt, no service, - are ok as they are applied equally to everyone.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083556

  • SP12
  • SP12's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Platinum Buzzer
  • Posts: 711
  • Well said received: 1089
  • Points: 21293
  • Honor Medal 2010

Rain wrote: It's 20 years tomorrow since Matthew Shepard died.

He was a 21 year old student from Wyoming. He was a gentle person of slight build and small stature. He was driven to a remote area by two men, beaten, tortured, tied to a fence and left to die. Matthew was killed because he was gay.

The singer Melissa Etheridge wrote a song called Sacrecrow about this crime, so called because the cyclist who found him thought he was a scarecrow at first.

You might not think this has much to do with the law saying it is alright to refuse baking a cake. But it does.

If the law gives out the message that gay people are inferior and are LESSER than everybody else it's telling people it's okay to treat gay people badly.

If you see someone being refused service in a shop because of their sexuality, it says to you it's okay to look down on them. It says it's okay to treat them differently. It says they are not equal to you.

What next?

Is it okay to call them names?

Is it okay to hit them?

Is it okay to kill them?

A proportion of people are gay. This has been known for a long, long time. It's high time society got over this fact and took a mature attitude that we are all unique and have our differences.

We are tall, we are short, we are dark, we are fair. Blue eyed, brown eyed. And yes; some of us are gay.

Shame on that judge who made this decision. He set society back into the dark days again and gave cart blanche to the gay bashers.

Remembering Matthew Shepard today and all those who weren't just refused service, they were refused the right to be treated as human...


They were not refused service because they were gay - the bakers refused to bake a cake with a slogan which went against their beliefs. Would you expect a Jewish baker to make a cake for a customer showing a nazi symbol? Would you expect a gay person to have to accept an order to make a banner protesting against gay rights?
The following user(s) said Well Said: wendeey, Pi, waterlily, Elspeth, Jane R, Rhett1, Serena77, Robin

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083560

  • Clytie
  • Clytie's Avatar
  • Online
  • New Buzzer
  • New Buzzer
  • Posts: 13
  • Well said received: 12
  • Points: 177
Baring in mind my best male friend us gay (the only man i trust with all my secrets) and we have discussed this at length
If we are protecting peoples rights we can't be choosy about whos rights we protect.
Do we discard the rights of the people in the bakery to protect the rights of the people who want the cake?
Do we force them to make the cake even though it goes against everything they believe in or should we just go to another bakery and stop making such a fuss?
Would we insist a muslim make us a bacon sandwich or a hindu cook us a beef steak? we can't force people to go against what they believe in or that is just another form of discrimination is it not?
The following user(s) said Well Said: SP12, cahoots, wendeey, Pi, Elspeth, Jane R, Serena77, Robin

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083566

  • Vegemite Kid
  • Vegemite Kid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 10399
  • Well said received: 11428
  • Points: 214479
  • Honor Medal 2010
Well, the 'they should just go somewhere else and stop making a fuss' gets used all the time to justify discrimination.

No, if they are in business they do business with everyone, not decide who should just go somewhere else.

The comparisons to Muslim or Hindu people cooking do not make sense.
A Muslim person can decide not to take a job where he has to cook bacon - what he can't decide is to cook bacon and only serve it to some people.

I am a little bit in 2 minds because of the icing a slogan thing - but people have to remember, like Kaygee said, it was a very narrow ruling for a very specific case

It wasn't Carte Blanche to discriminate against gay people.
And I can see Rain's concern that some people will take it that way - indeed, already in the thread we have declarations of I can choose not to serve anyone.
No you can't and that isn't what the ruling said.


PS my best friend is gay but..... doesn't strengthen your stance.
The following user(s) said Well Said: cahoots

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083578

  • Clytie
  • Clytie's Avatar
  • Online
  • New Buzzer
  • New Buzzer
  • Posts: 13
  • Well said received: 12
  • Points: 177
i never said it strengthened my stance and only mentioned it as we discussed this between us,, because that's what we do. i never said "but"
we all have a right to do what we feel is right for us and why would you want to give business to people who didn't want you. i wouldn't want to give my money to someone who had offended me.
When i was young my then husband and i wore leathers, went around on a motorbike and were part of an MC, we were all refused service in many places, what we did was took our business elsewhere to where is was wanted.
"No, if they are in business they do business with everyone, not decide who should just go somewhere else" any business can refuse service to anyone and they don't even need a reason.
I personally don't agree with them refusing to give them a service however i do respect their rights to do what they feel is right for them, at the end of the day it is them that has lost this business and probably lost other orders too because of it.
The following user(s) said Well Said: Robin

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Bakery in "gay cake" wins Supreme Court Appeal. 9 months 1 week ago #3083587

  • Pi
  • Pi's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Titanium Buzzer
  • Posts: 2111
  • Well said received: 3270
  • Points: 40866
  • Honor Medal 2010

Vegemite Kid wrote: Well, the 'they should just go somewhere else and stop making a fuss' gets used all the time to justify discrimination.

No, if they are in business they do business with everyone, not decide who should just go somewhere else.

The comparisons to Muslim or Hindu people cooking do not make sense.
A Muslim person can decide not to take a job where he has to cook bacon - what he can't decide is to cook bacon and only serve it to some people.

I am a little bit in 2 minds because of the icing a slogan thing - but people have to remember, like Kaygee said, it was a very narrow ruling for a very specific case

It wasn't Carte Blanche to discriminate against gay people.

And I can see Rain's concern that some people will take it that way - indeed, already in the thread we have declarations of I can choose not to serve anyone.
No you can't and that isn't what the ruling said.


PS my best friend is gay but..... doesn't strengthen your stance.



It was carte blanche to choose which slogans you are prepared to copy/print/ice, which would have no link to discrimination against the person asking for the message to be reproduced in any form either printed, electronically reproduced or decorated.

And yes, business owners have the right to choose who they wish not to serve provided they do not discriminate against the set few categories ie scruffy people but not exclusively scruffy gay people.
The following user(s) said Well Said: Robin

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: smilesrus10pascaloumikePats
Time to create page: 0.225 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum

Over 50 forums just for seniors Join Free here!

Buzz50 is one of the few sites where the forums are strictly restricted to those who are over 50 only.

Our senior forums are run by over 50s purely for over 50s to enjoy. If you like serious or even light hearted discussions then this is the place for you.