Tag: Ashers Bakery

Ashers Bakery is a Christian run Ashers Baking Co. in Northern Ireland who refused to make a pro-gay marriage cake, which featured a slogan “Support Gay Marriage – Queer Space Born 1998”. They battled through the UK court system to prove that the denial of service wasn’t discrimination.

  • This photographer agency just refused service to “gay-cake” bakers

    This photographer agency just refused service to “gay-cake” bakers

    “We appreciate that this looks like tit for tat, and it is”

    (C) PERFOCAL

    Perfocal, a photographer booking agency just refused service to the Ashers Bakery following on from the UK Supreme Court ruling yesterday which said that the bakery had not discriminated against a customer because of his sexuality, but because of the political message, he had asked the cake, “Support Gay Marriage” to be emblazoned with.

    Perfocal enables members of the public to book photographers in major UK cities is, after learning of the details of a job they were booked for, refusing to share the photographs taken with The Christian Institute, a charity and lobby group supporting the owners of a Northern Irish bakery at the centre of a discrimination row.

    The Christian owners of a Northern Ireland bakery won their appeal at the Supreme Court yesterday after refusing to make a cake with the slogan ‘Support Gay Marriage’. The dispute began in 2014, after the customer, gay rights activist Gareth Lee, sued the company for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and political beliefs after the bakery had already accepted payment for the order.

    Charity and lobby group The Christian Institute, paying the legal fees for the family that owned the bakery, used a photographer booking website to capture the moments before and after the case was heard. With estimated legal fees of £450,000 between both parties, the £36.50 cake has been described as ‘the most expensive cake in UK history’.

    Private companies can accept bookings and then cancel if it offends their sensibilities.

    The founder of the photographer booking website, Perfocal.com, has said in a statement on the company’s blog that the photographer booked on the day has been paid in full for their time by Perfocal, and the Christian Institute has been refunded. The Christian Institute paid for a 3-hour photography session, photo edit, all photos and extra for a 24-hour turnaround as opposed to the company’s usual 48-hour service. The statement made is within that 24-hour period, and the customer has been contacted.

    The statement, including details of the £239 (+ £28 for rush delivery) booking, can be read here

    In a statement, Tony Xu, the founder of the photographer booking site Perfocal.com said,

    “It’s been accepted in the highest court in the UK that private companies can accept bookings and then, if they feel that it goes against their morals, refuse that booking if it offends their sensibilities and it not be counted as discriminatory.

    “We appreciate that this looks like tit for tat, and it is. We had no idea what the case was when the booking was made – we simply see the basic information, date, time, location. When our photographer on the ground learned what it was while doing the job, they felt immediately uncomfortable with the situation, as many members of the public are, but remained professional. As soon as I found out though, I realised this was an opportunity to highlight exactly why this kind of result is damaging. This isn’t just about standing up against discrimination, I hope our stance serves as an example of exactly where this kind of judgement could lead us. Where does it end?”

    In the blog statement, Xu highlighted that the company is ‘proud to have been booked for many religious ceremonies’, including Christian, Jewish and Muslim celebrations and same-sex weddings, including high-profile individuals, and that they welcome customers from all backgrounds.

  • UK Supreme Courts rules that “gay cake” bakery did not discriminate on the basis of sexuality

    The UK’s highest court has ruled that Ashers Bakery did not discriminate against a customer because of his sexuality.

    gay cake, wedding,
    (C) Londondeposit Depositphoto

    Speaking on the ruling President Lady Brenda Hale said, “It is deeply humiliating, and an affront to human dignity, to deny someone a service because of that person’s race, gender, disability, sexual orientation or any of the other protected personal characteristics, but that is not what happened in this case.”

    “The bakers did not refuse to fulfil his order because of his sexual orientation. They would have refused to make such a cake for any customer, irrespective of their sexual orientation.”

    “The bakers could not refuse to supply their goods to Mr Lee because he was a gay man or supported gay marriage but that is quite different from obliging them to supply a cake iced with a message with which they profoundly disagreed.”

    Baroness Hale once called for a “conscience clause” for Christians who have anti-gay beliefs during a trial of anti-gay B&B owners, Peter and Hazelmary Bull.

    First, they lost, but appeal after appeal, finally success for Ashers Bakery

    The Asher’s Bakery row has rolled on since 2014 when the Christian run Ashers Baking Co. in Northern Ireland refused to make a pro-gay marriage cake, which featured a slogan “Support Gay Marriage – Queer Space Born 1998” with a picture of Sesame Street characters Ernie and Bert, because it says it clashed with the ethos of their company, saying,

    ‘We thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs, certainly was in contradiction with what the Bible teaches.’

    Queer Space is an organisation, which seeks to increase the visibility of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) Community in a positive manner to counteract the disregard, and negative images presented to the general public.

    “Discrimination Clash”

    Rhian Radia is a leading lawyer who specialises in discrimination cases, and a Director at Vardags. She said today, “A judgment of the Supreme Court today has found that a bakery in Northern Ireland did not discriminate against a gay man by refusing to bake him a cake with a message supporting gay marriage.

    “The bakers oppose the introduction of gay marriage on religious grounds. The Supreme Court’s decision found that the refusal to bake the cake was because of the message on the cake rather than the sexual orientation of the customer or his association with Queerspace, a volunteer-led organisation for the LGBT community. Sexual orientation and support of gay marriage were viewed to be two separate things. The judges decided that people of all sexual orientations can and do support gay marriage.

    “The judgment is being touted as a victory for free speech by those who believe that the bakers should not have been forced to bake a case with a message they disagreed with.

    “This is the latest in a line of employment law cases where types of protection from discrimination clash with each other, in this case religious belief and sexual orientation and political belief. But is baking a cake as part of providing a service to a customer really about free speech where the rights of a business beat those of an individual?”

    Time Line:

    JULY 2014: Gareth Lee reports that Ashers Bakery refused to bake him a gay which said “Support Gay Marriage”. The Christian Institute provided the bakery with legal support.

    MAY 2015: A UK court found in 2015 that Ashers Bakery had been unlawful in refusing to bake a cake for Gareth Lee. The bakery owners were ordered to pay £500 in damages.

    JUNE 2015: The bakery announces its outline for appeal

    OCTOBER 2016: Ashers loses it appeal at the Court of Appeal, which upheld the original judgement that the bakers had acted unlawfully.

    NOVEMBER 2016: Ashers announce it is to appeal again

    OCTOBER 2018: Ashers wins its case in the UK Supreme Court

     

    The McArthurs, who own the company, have insisted that the issue was never with Mr Lee’s sexuality, but with the message that he had requested on the cake.

     

     

     

  • PETER TATCHELL: Ashers “gay cake” verdict is a victory

    Leading human rights activist has said that verdict that the Ashers Bakery did not discriminate in refusing to make a “gay cake” is a victory for freedom of expression.

    Cake, Gay Marriage, gay wedding
    CREDIT: © ivonnewierink Depositphotos

    Peter Tatchell has described the act of same-sex marriage as a “political idea” and that no business should be forced to produce a product that they have a ‘conscientious objection” to. He stated that the verdict that the Ashers Bakery did not discriminate in refusing to honour an hour for a cake which had “Although I profoundly disagree with Asher’s opposition to marriage equality, in a free society neither they nor anyone else should be forced to facilitate a political idea that they oppose”.

    He added, “Businesses can now lawfully refuse a customer’s request to emblazon a political message if they have a conscientious objection to it. This includes the right to refuse messages that are sexist, xenophobic or anti-gay, which is a good thing”.

    Appeal after appeal

    The Asher’s Bakery row has rolled on since 2014 when the Christian run Ashers Baking Co. in Northern Ireland refused to make a pro-gay marriage cake, which featured a slogan “Support Gay Marriage – Queer Space Born 1998” with a picture of Sesame Street characters Ernie and Bert, because it says it clashed with the ethos of their company, saying,

    ‘We thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs, certainly was in contradiction with what the Bible teaches.’

    Queer Space is an organisation, which seeks to increase the visibility of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) Community in a positive manner to counteract the disregard, and negative images presented to the general public.

    They didn’t discriminate because the customer was gay…

    Tatchell continued, “Ashers did not discriminate against the customer, Gareth Lee, because he was gay. They objected to the message he wanted on the cake: ‘Support gay marriage.’

    “Discrimination against LGBT people is wrong. But in a free society, people should be able to discriminate against ideas that they disagree with. I am glad the court upheld this important liberal principle.

    “If the original judgement against Ashers had been upheld it would have meant that a Muslim printer could be obliged to publish cartoons of Mohammed and a Jewish printer could be forced to publish a book that propagates Holocaust denial. It could have also encouraged far right extremists to demand that bakers and other service providers facilitate the promotion of anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim opinions.

    “That would have set a dangerous, authoritarian precedent that could have been open to serious abuse.

    “Discrimination against people should be illegal but not discrimination against ideas and opinions,” said Mr Tatchell.

  • Yep. Those Christian bakers are going to appeal. Again

    They aren’t giving up. Those Ashers Bakery owners are now going to appeal to the UK’s highest court.

    Despite two court rulings defining their decision not to bake a “gay cake” as discriminatory and unlawful, Ashers Bakery owners, the McArthurs, are appealing to the UK’s Supreme Court according to The Evening Standard.

    Gareth Lee the LGBT activist who initially ordered a cake in 2014 which bore the inscription “Support gay marriage” had his order denied by the company whose bosses cited that the “order was at odds” with their beliefs. They added that the supportive message was “in contradiction with what the Bible teaches.”

    An original court case found that the bosses had acted unlawfully. District Judge Isobel Brownlie ordered the firm to pay damages of £500 after ruling that religious beliefs could not dictate the law.

    Last month judges at the Court of Appeal upheld the original judgement. However, the family behind the bakery is not satisfied and the family’s legal team have written to the Appeal Court judges in Belfast, “to consider giving a short ruling on the question of whether (an) appeal to the United Kingdom Supreme Court is available in this case”.

    The McArthurs have insisted that the issue was never with Mr Lee’s sexuality, but with the message that he had requested on the cake.

  • OPINION | The Ashers Baking verdict, and why gay cake is just the thin end of the wedge

    So the McArthurs of the Ashers Baking Company in Northern Ireland have lost another appeal against their conviction. They remain guilty of discrimination after refusing to bake a cake with a message in support of gay marriage and were justifiably sued.

    Good. It’s high time governments stopped offering up LGBTQ people as sacrifices to appease the wrath of the faith communities (sorry – to appease the religionists’ angry deities). Enough is enough.

    Shouldn’t court rooms be hearing more important cases than that of a bakery refusing business to a customer? Shouldn’t gay people just shrug their shoulders, say “Live and let live,” and whistle their way to the next bakery in town to try their luck there?

    No, and no. I’ll explain why.

    It’s vaguely amusing but also disconcerting that many people commenting on media websites running with this story keep asking (as if to indicate an equivalence) if Jewish bakers should be forced to make cakes with pro-Hitler messages on them. Whilst we can all agree that Jews make the best-baked goods, what these apologists for bigotry are truthfully pointing out is that it is as offensive to some religious people to provide a service to gay people as it is for a Jew to be goaded about the Holocaust. Do these woolly-minded accommodationists (who includes Peter Tatchell amongst their ranks) think all bigots should be appeased? Can racist B&B owners dust down their 1960’s “no blacks, no Irish, no Jews” signs and pin them in their windows? No, as usual, it’s only the gays that are fair game.

    There is a wider issue in identifying this problem too, because as good, progressive pluralists, we’re all supposed to ‘respect’ religious traditions, even though very little respect is usually forthcoming the other way. Gay people should not lose sight of how big a threat religion is to our liberties, and, in many countries in the world, even our lives.

    It’s no accident that Italy was the last western European country to recognise gay relationships in law for property and inheritance rights, and even then with the manipulative Catholic Church breathing its unedifying signatures of fire, brimstone and hellfire in the background.

    This is no minor quibble about pastry. The Church of England – our state religion – voted unanimously against marriage equality: their fear was, as always, concerned with not causing a rift in the Anglican Communion; far better to throw gays under the bus than to stand up for common human decency. In Northern Ireland, where religion holds more sway, in order to appease the greater number of bigots, gay marriage remains illegal. In more religious places still, such as many Commonwealth and all Islamic countries, homosexuality is illegal, and often punishable by death. The more religious a country, the worse things are for LGBT people. That’s why this is no small fight, and the stakes in cases like this are high.

    The arguments in favour of the McArthurs’ discrimination are pretty poor. The McArthurs suggest that to make a cake with a pro-gay message would indicate their endorsement of it. What rubbish. Do executives of all commercial channels personally endorse every advertiser and their associated products they run with? Does every publisher endorse the point of view of every author they publish? Of course not.

    Not only that, but how on earth in modern pluralistic societies would we ever get anywhere if every crazy belief from every religionist had to be accommodated by the rest of the human population? So much of this is excuse-mongering. The gays are an easy target of religionists because we remain their favourite bogeyman: I wonder if the McArthurs previously refused cakes to divorcees, or to members of other faiths, or even other denominations? I’m guessing not. The hypocrisy of being fussy over your own faith’s regulations is the speciality of zealots everywhere.

    How have we arrived at this ridiculous state of affairs? Appeasement has a lot to do with it. Religious lobbies are loud and well-organised, and governments are always keen to throw them a bone to win a few votes. They are used to being able to treat LGBT people as sub-human. They’ve gotten away with it for so long. Look at the comments threads of any news story about this, and you’ll see that homophobia is one of three remaining socially acceptable bigotries amongst centrists and leftists (sexism and anti-Semitism being the others).

    The problem, too, is that you can’t reason with extremist religionists. When you have a situation where a partially-educated adult can reject the obvious facts of evolution and cosmology in favour of a view of the world that says it was formed a few thousand years ago, and that humans were divinely created (Zac Efron, maybe, but most of the time, give me a break), then they’ll choose to quote Leviticus rather than see the humanity of LGBT people.

    Hence the presence of the McArthurs outside the court room today, expressing their bewilderment at having lost the case (in fact, only Mr McArthur spoke. The little wife kept entirely silent by his side, presumably knowing her place, whilst her husband tub-thumped and pointed to the sky, to help the casual viewer determine the alleged location of his angry celestial overlord), and suggesting that to have baked the cake would have been a ‘sin’.

    A sin.

    We’ve arrived at this verdict today because religious fundamentalists choose to whittle down the entirely of our lives and our relationships to one word – sin. It matters that we fight for the small rights like not to be discriminated against in the provision of goods and services because we have the right to be treated as human, and we should not have to apologise for our very presence. When religious people can look at a loving gay couple and see only sin, then that is a dark and dangerous societal problem and one that responsible governments should seek to address, and intervene where necessary. When religious people can think that the best thing a gay couple can do is to break up, throw away their love in favour of celibate lives, or lives of horrible deceit, entering into faux straight relationships, before they are willing to accept us, then we can know that there is no point in attempting reason, because they will never accept us.

    That’s why equality legislation exists, and why individual human rights should always be favoured over and above ideologies. People are more important than ideas. Whatever the religious think, sexuality isn’t chosen. Crazy beliefs are.

    I wear the battle scars from this. Simply marrying the love of my life tore my family in two, and the devastating consequences rumble on. So often there is no accommodation where religion is concerned. So let’s not be sanguine that the Irish voted for marriage equality – it doesn’t mean that gay people from Catholic families are now free from bigotry, abuse and rejection. I’m living testament against that fantasy. There are battles remaining to be fought and won.

    We should have no quarrel with progressive faith leaders like Dave Tomlinson, who opposes the actions of his community’s leaders and wants to change hearts and minds. Gay charities should seek dialogue with faith communities, and gay people less cynical and less hurt by religion than me might be able to make some progress into reaching a place where our existence is not an affront to the faithful and our relationships and marriages are not reduced to notions of ‘sin’.

    Don’t fool yourself though, there will be plenty of other casualties along the way.

    But let’s celebrate the verdict today. The McArthurs failed, which indicates that their side is losing the larger argument, and people are more swayed by reason than by superstition (either that, or their deity is on our side too).

    So yes, the cake matters. Taking ordinary human interactions for granted is a hallmark of a civilised, tolerant, accepting society. It’s time the religious grew out of their sulk and joined the adult table. If they can stop being offended by the existence of gay people, they may actually learn something about human compassion they won’t find in their holy books.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • Christian bakers lose “gay cake” appeal

    BREAKING: Northern Ireland Christian bakers, Ashers Bakery, have lost their “gay cake” appeal at an appeal court.

    baker loses gay cake appeal
    (C) Londondeposit Depositphoto

    This story is being updated, please refresh to see new content.

    A bakery in Northern Ireland has lost its appeal against a court ruling that its decision to refuse to bake a “gay cake” as discriminatory.

    The judge said according to the BBC that “it did not follow that icing a message meant you supported that message.”

    In 2014, gay rights activist Gareth Lee tried to order a cake which the bakers refused to make because it had the inscription “Support Gay Marriage”.

    The Christian-run Ashers Baking Co. in Northern Ireland refused to make a pro-gay marriage cake, which featured a slogan “Support Gay Marriage – Queer Space Born 1998” with a picture of Sesame Street characters Ernie and Bert, because it says it clashed with the ethos of their company, saying,

    “We thought that this order was at odds with our beliefs, certainly was in contradiction with what the Bible teaches.”

    In May 2015, a UK Court has found that the bakery had acted unlawfully when it refused to fulfil the order.

  • Peter Tatchell Has Changed His Mind On Gay Cake Ruling

    Peter Tatchell has said that he was “wrong” about the gay cake row and that he has changed his mind.

    In 2014 a bakery in Northern Ireland refused to make a cake with the inscription “support gay marriage” citing the owner’s religious beliefs. The cake was order by an gay right’s activist called Gareth Lee, who subsequently took Ashers Bakery to court. The court found that the owners acted “unlawfully” in denying service to Lee.

    At the time the judge said,

    “Whilst defendants have right to religious beliefs they are limited as to how they manifest them.”

    Writing in the Guardian today leading human rights advocate Peter Tatchell said that he was “wrong” in supporting Lee’s legal claim and has said that the law “should not require bakers to promote gay marriage”.

    Two days before the Asher’s is considered by the Appeal court Tatchell has changed his mind saying that he wants to “defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion” as well as defend the rights of the gay community.

     

    Speaking about his U-turn Tatchell said,

    “I profoundly disagree with Asher’s opposition to same-sex love and marriage, and support protests against them. They claim to be Christians and followers of Jesus. Yet he never once condemned homosexuality. Moreover, discrimination is not a Christian value…

    “Nevertheless, on reflection, the court was wrong to penalise Ashers and I was wrong to endorse its decision…

    “For sure, the law suit against the bakery was well intended. It sought to challenge homophobia. But it was a step too far. ..

    “The judge concluded that service providers are required to facilitate any “lawful” message, even if they have a conscientious objection. This raises the question: should Muslim printers be obliged to publish cartoons of Mohammed? Or Jewish ones publish the words of a Holocaust denier? Or gay bakers accept orders for cakes with homophobic slurs? If the Ashers verdict stands it could, for example, encourage far-right extremists to demand that bakeries and other service providers facilitate the promotion of anti-migrant and anti-Muslim opinions. It would leave businesses unable to refuse to decorate cakes or print posters with bigoted messages.

    “In my view, it is an infringement of freedom to require businesses to aid the promotion of ideas to which they conscientiously object. Discrimination against people should be unlawful, but not against ideas.”

  • When Companies Get It Wrong On Gay Matters

    A number of businesses have found themselves at the end of a boycott, or a viral campaign by the gay community and its allies after denying service or discriminating against LGBT customers. Here is just ten of the most high profile that have happened in the last two years.

    Asher’s Bakery – Historic ruling on gay cake equality.

    The owners of Asher’s Bakery in Northern Ireland, were found to have acted unlawfully in a historic legal case after refusing to make a cake that bore the wording: “Support Gay Marriage.” Gareth Lee, a gay rights activist, took the civil case to court with the support of the Equality Commission. The case became so high profile that Prime Minister David Cameron waded in to comment on his commitment to equality.

    Dolce And Gabbana – Don’t talk about gay parents or IVF.

    The fashion duo found themselves on the end of a long Twitter storm that did untold damage to their luxury brand.

    Speaking to the Italian magazine Panorama, alongside his business partner, Stefano Gabbana, Domenico Dolce said children should be born to a mother and a father, “The only family is a traditional one. I’m not convinced by those I call the chemical children, synthetic babies…They are wombs for hire, semen chosen from a catalogue … psychiatrists are not ready to confront the effects of this experimentation.”

    Stefano Gabbana added: “The family is not a fad.”

    The designing duo did backtrack on what they had said, but the damage had been done by that point.

     

    Sweet Cakes – No cakes for gays.

    Sweet Cakes is a US bakery that was fined $135000 for discriminating against a gay couple. The owners refused to make a wedding cake. The owners went to GoFundMe crowdfunding site to look for donations to pay their fines. After GoFundMe pulled the campaign they started another on ContinueToGive, which saw them raise 3 times the amount they had originally asked for.

     

    Memories Pizza – No pizza for gay weddings.

    The owners of Memories Pizza didn’t actually discriminate but said that they would. The comments went viral and before long the owners said that they had been driven underground. A crowdfunder campaign was started for them, which went on to raise over $800,000 in donations.

     

    Subway – A promo for all couples… Except for gay couples.

    A Subway restaurateur from Angers in France displayed a promotion in his window that excluded gay couples  because the marriage bill for marriage equality hadn’t officially passed. A spokesperson from Subway said, “The SUBWAY® brand is committed to maintaining a diverse and inclusive environment around the world and does not condone discrimination of any kind. We apologize to anyone who was offended by this individual store’s Valentine’s Day promotion in Angers, France. All SUBWAY stores are independently owned and operated. We are working with the owner to reinforce our corporate values and policies.

     

    Armani – Don’t Dress Like A Homosexual.

    Giorgio Armani rattled some feathers when in an interview with The Sunday Times Magazine he said, “A homosexual man is a man 100 per cent. He does not need to dress homosexual.

    “When homosexuality is exhibited to the extreme – to say: ‘Ah, you know I’m homosexual,’ – that has nothing to do with me. A man has to be a man.”

     

    Coca Cola – All about the gay marriage, unless it’s not legal…

    Coco-Cola the world’s biggest drinks manufacturer was slammed for removing a gay couple segment from the Irish version of the advert. The advert was apparently tweaked to fit where the advert is shown – with the gay couple being shown everywhere in Europe where gay marriage and civil partnerships are currently legal. A spokesperson for the drinks company said:

    “The wedding images used in the ad for the UK and in other parts of Europe show two men getting married.

    “The reason this was changed for Ireland is while civil partnership for gay people is legal, gay marriage currently is not. We wanted each ad to be relevant and valid for its own market.”

    Since the adverts creation Ireland went on to legalise same-sex marriage.

     

    Barilla Pasta – Let them eat another brand

    The company which was founded in 1827 and reportedly made €3.9b in revenues in 2010 has came under fire after its chairman Guido Barilla, gave an interview to La Zanzara Radio24, in which he offended many LGBT customers.

    He was answering a question regarding the lack of gay families in the company’s advertising. He suggested that gay couples would never be used saying,

    ‘”Our family is a traditional family,’ he added that he,

    “wouldn’t do an ad with a homosexual family not because I disrespect gays – they have their right to do whatever they want without disturbing others – but because I don’t think like them and I think that the family we try to address is anyway a classic family.”

    Barilla then went on to suggest that if gay people didn’t like the company’s values, they could ‘eat another brand’.

    Since the fallout, Barillo committed to creating an advisory board on diversity and said that advertising campaign would be more inclusive.

     

    Chick-Fil-A Palin in a bun

    Chick-Fil-A president Dan Cathy doesn’t like same-sex marriage and was basically jumped by Sarah Palin in her approval of his message. Cathy tweeted that the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a key part of the Defence of Marriage Act is a “sad day for our nation,”then promptly deleted it. In 2012 Sarah Palin went on Twitter to support the chain that many from the LGBT community have boycotted.

     

    Thistles No Double Beds for Gays

    In Feb 2013 a gay couple claimed that a receptionist at Thistles hotel in Barbican denied them a pre-booked double room. The reception is alleged to repeatedly ask whether the couple wanted single beds. Nick Hurley and his partner tweeted their disgust saying that the receptionist was homophobic.

    Thistle Hotels quickly responded by apologising and stating that they had a zero tolerance policy on discrimination, but not before Nick Hurley’s tweet was retweeted 2642 times

  • Anti-Gay Marriage Cake Baker Outlines Appeal Grounds

    Anti-Gay Marriage Cake Baker Outlines Appeal Grounds

    The Christian-run bakery which refused to bake a pro-marriage cake has outlined its appeal to the judgement that found it had acted unlawfully in refusing the cake order.

    The bakery, in Northern Ireland, was found to have acted unlawfully when it refused to make a cake that bore a pro-gay marriage slogan for Gareth Lee, by a court last month. It was ordered to pay £500 in compensation to Mr Lee.

    In a statement released by the Christian Institute, an organisation that has funded many appeals against legal matters surrounding gay issues, has raised three questions to support their appeal.

    1. Whether the judge was correct, as a matter of law, to hold that Ashers had discriminated against Mr Lee directly on grounds of sexual orientation.
    2. Whether the judge was correct, as a matter of law, to hold that Ashers had discriminated against Mr Lee directly on grounds of religious belief or political opinion.
    3. Whether the judge was correct, as a matter of law, to hold that Ashers was not entitled to protection as a result of the rights under Articles 9 and/or 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

    A spokesperson for the Christian Institute, Simon Calvert, believes that “most people” would support an overturning of the ruling that found that the business had acted unlawfully, this despite a poll undertaken in 2014 which showed that the majority supported same-sex marriage.

    The Christian Institute is a registered charity that has sought to retain section 28, to raise the age of consent for gay people and opposed the Civil Partnership Act and same-sex marriage act.

    The Christian Institute has backed many legal actions in the past, but has been unsuccessful in many attempts, most notably the Christian Institute backed Hotel owners Mr and Mrs Ball, who infamously denied lodgings to a gay couple. Numerous attempts of appeal have all subsequently failed.

     

  • Sir Patrick Stewart Supports Anti-Gay Marriage Bakers

    Long time very vocal ally of the gay community Sir Patrick Stewart shocked many of his fans the other night during an interview on BBC’s Newsnight by publicly supporting the Northern Ireland anti-gay marriage bakers.

    Gay rights activist Gareth Lee had commissioned Ashers Baking Co., a Christian-owned bakery in Northern Ireland, to make a cake that was decorated with “Support Gay Marriage’ which they refused to do, quoting their religious beliefs. So Lee sued them and won the case, and the bakery now plans to appeal the decision.

    Later on Facebook Sir Patrick wrote:

    “As part of my advocacy for Amnesty International, I gave an interview on a number of subjects related to human rights, civil rights and freedom of speech. During the interview, I was asked about the Irish bakers who refused to put a message on a cake which supported marriage equality, because of their beliefs. In my view, this particular matter was not about discrimination, but rather personal freedoms and what constitutes them, including the freedom to object. Both equality and freedom of speech are fundamental rights—and this case underscores how we need to ensure one isn’t compromised in the pursuit of the other.

    “I know many disagree with my sentiments, including the courts. I respect and understand their position, especially in this important climate where the tides of prejudices and inequality are (thankfully) turning. What I cannot respect is that some have conflated my position on this single matter to assume I’m anti-equality or that I share the personal beliefs of the bakers. Nothing, absolutely nothing, could be further from the truth. I have long championed the rights of the LGBT community, because equality should not only be, as the people of Ireland powerfully showed the world, universally embraced, but treasured.”

    Sir Patrick’s last movie role was in Match when he played a gay dance professor.

  • UK COURT: Unlawful Discriminaton For Christian Bakery Who Refused Gay Cake

    BREAKING: A UK Court has found that a bakery in Belfast, owned by Christians acted unlawfully when it refused to fulfil an order which had an inscription in support of same-sex marriage.

    Ashers Bakery in Belfast, Northern Ireland refused an order by Gareth Lee in July 2014. The cake in question had a message that supported same-sex marriage.

    The bakery owners refused the order based on their Christian beliefs Gareth Lee a gay rights activist took the civil case against the bakery with the support of the Equality Commission.

    A judge has ruled that the bakery’s refused to make the cake was unlawful. The judge commented:

    “Whilst defendants have right to religious beliefs they are limited as to how they manifest them.”

    https://twitter.com/DeborahMcAleese/status/600598827700224000?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    Speaking outside the Belfast court just before the ruling, Ashers general manager Daniel McArthur said:

    “We happily serve everyone but we cannot promote a cause that goes against what the Bible says about marriage.

    “We have tried to be guided in our actions by our Christian beliefs.”

    Mr Lee told the court that the decision to refuse his order him feel “unworthy” and ” a lesser person”.

    A Belfast judge said Ashers were not exempt from discrimination law adding that the bakery were “conducting a business for profit”, they are not a religious group.”

    They were found to have discriminated against Mr Lee on the grounds of sexual orientation.

    https://twitter.com/DeborahMcAleese/status/600594149063204866?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw