Jump to content

Asher's Bakery Belfast - Lose Court Appeal Over Gay Wedding Cake.


RedRob72

Recommended Posts

Appeal lost and £88,000 anticipated in Court Costs.

Is this a breach of the owners religious rights (and Christian beliefs) or did the Judge rule correctly in that baking a cake for a same sex couple wasn't an endorsement of their sexual preferences and lifestyle.

Was the intention to purposefully target the shop to challenge their stance in the first place?

What says P&B?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply

In terms of the law, it seems a bit sketchy to me. If the business refused service on the grounds that the customer was homosexual, then that would be in direct breach of the Equality Act. But the argument wasn't about who the customer was, but rather what they were asking the business to produce. This is where it get's a bit of a mess, because on one hand, the business provides the service of designing and baking cakes, on the other hand, if somebody came in and asked for a design that could be deemed offensive, then the business you would think would be well within their right to deny that service.

Now obviously in the modern age, homosexuality is supposed to be perceived as no offensive and an acceptable part of society. But then you have the obvious issue of people with strongly held religious beliefs who may feel that by providing certain services, they are betraying their own religion.

It's a difficult one with no simple solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell the refusal was based on the message, not on the sexuality of the customer. That doesn't seem discriminatory to me.

I wonder if a Christian went to a gay bakers and asked for a cake with 'No to Gay Marriage' and they refused if that would be discriminatory.

I don't like that this couple refused to bake the cake, and their 'opposition to homosexuality' makes me uncomfortable and it seems to me highly likely that they are homophobes and should be called out as such, however I don't see this as a case of discrimination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I can see both sides, the crux is that noone in a private situation should be forced to offer a service that they do not want to offer, regardless of the situation. This case reeks of entitlement, basically saying that the owners should be forced to bake them a cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I can see both sides, the crux is that noone in a private situation should be forced to offer a service that they do not want to offer, regardless of the situation. This case reeks of entitlement, basically saying that the owners should be forced to bake them a cake.


I have to disagree, they refused due to the sexuality of the couple, not because the owner had fallen out with the clients over a darts match, there are laws in place for one, not the other. No argument.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have to disagree, they refused due to the sexuality of the couple, not because the owner had fallen out with the clients over a darts match, there are laws in place for one, not the other. No argument.


Is there any evidence they refused due to the sexuality of the couple?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's similar to the Cornish couple who refused a booking from a same sex couple at their holiday guest house. They also had their appeal rejected, ruling that you can't refuse a business service based on the gender of a prospective customer. As JMO mentions above I guess it was the message they were uncomfortable with, but they'd hardly asked for some sort of phallic representation sticking out of it![emoji47]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DI Bruce Robertson said:


I have to disagree, they refused due to the sexuality of the couple,

But that's the point, they never. If the couple had came in and asked for a different design of cake, then there most likely wouldn't have been a problem. It was what they were asking for that caused the company to deny them service.

Also, terms like "homophobes" and "backwards thinking" are unhelpful. There's nothing backwards about somebody holding a different opinion, no matter how much you disagree with it. Liberty gives people the freedom to hold whatever views they wish to hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


In recognition of yours & JMO's posts, yes I am wrong & apologise.
For me, it amounts to the same thing, the argument was about discrimination and my opinion, as well as 2 courts was & is that there was discrimination, so yes the decision is Tough- luck.


Do you believe that Gareth Lee, a Gay Rights Activist, targeted the Christian owned bakery intentionally?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jmothecat said:

Is there any evidence they refused due to the sexuality of the couple?

 

If only there was some body somewhere that was suitably qualified to examine the evidence and evaluate whether that was indeed true in the context appropriate to enforcing the law

Until such time as a judgement from such a body appears our best chance of a sound verdict is a football message board
 

I'm saying "Yes"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...