Christian bakers versus the Equality Act

[Aquinas]

Should a Christian baker be prosecuted for refusing to bake a cake with the design depicted below?



It alarms me to learn that precisely this scenario is playing out in Northern Ireland at the moment. Personally I am a strong supporter of equality and I oppose unjust discrimination. I also support the general principles behind the UK's Equality Act. But isn't this going too far? We may think the bakers are being narrow and mean-minded, but surely their religious conscience should be respected in a matter like this. After all, they are declining to bake the cake on the grounds that they object to its political message ("Support Gay Marriage"), not because the person ordering the cake was gay. The risk, I fear, is that incidents like this will provoke a reactionary backlash which will, in the long run, make society less rather than more tolerant of sexual minorities.

[EEL123]

I think that it's utterly outrageous for anyone to be compelled to disseminate a political message. People have an absolute right to refrain from communicating a political message which they disagree with. Don't we always tell bankers and big business to pass up the opportunity to make money and follow their consciences? Why should that not apply to the baker in question (even if their conscience, in this case, is stupid)? This whole affair is slipping from non-discrimination to the "tyranny of political correctness" (as someone, I forget who, put it in a very different context).

[Nickmaster]

Discrimination is a horrible thing, but unfortunately there really isn't a quick solution to it. I believe legislation forcing people to support a movement is an attempt at a quick and easy solution. Lawmakers have this idea that legislation ends discrimination. While we wish that we're true, it isn't. History has proven countless times that hate can work it's way around law,and sometimes even into it. It is a pointless and perhaps even harmful endeavor when we attempt to end hate with laws, instead of education and time.

I also want to argue as to why members of the LGBT movement would want to enrich those who are so strongly opposed to their freedom and their happiness, Assuming they have a choice of bakery.

[EEL123]

Yes, of course they should be prosecuted. No question about it. Homophobia is discrimination and isn't acceptable in any modern democracy.

If they had refused to serve them because they were gay, then you'd have more of a case (although I personally believe that people's property rights extend to them being able to exclude people from their property on unsatisfactory grounds, though I'd certainly want to do my best to make life difficult for them). But there is a difference between homophobic and simply refusing to disseminate a political message. When you are forced to disseminate a political message, that's no longer about gay rights or non-discrimination but an issue of freedom of speech, which necessarily implies the right not to say something.

[soysauce]

This wasn't a political message, it was an anti discrimination message. If this was a cake asserting that Black people should have equal rights and they refused to print it then of course we wouldn't stand for it, I don't see why this is any different.

[MichaelReilly]

Yes, of course they should be prosecuted. No question about it. Homophobia is discrimination and isn't acceptable in any modern democracy.

If they had refused to serve them because they were gay, then you'd have more of a case (although I personally believe that people's property rights extend to them being able to exclude people from their property on unsatisfactory grounds, though I'd certainly want to do my best to make life difficult for them). But there is a difference between homophobic and simply refusing to disseminate a political message. When you are forced to disseminate a political message, that's no longer about gay rights or non-discrimination but an issue of freedom of speech, which necessarily implies the right not to say something.

I actually agree with this, believe it or not. I absolutely do not support the bakers stance, but the fact is they are refusing to put across a political message that they don't agree with rather than discriminating directly against the customer on the basis of their sexuality. The cake maker hasn't gone "I'm not serving you, you're gay". He's gone "I don't agree with the message you want me to put across, I'm not serving you". He owns the business and has the right to refuse to not put across political viewpoints he doesn't agree with.

[MichaelReilly]

This wasn't a political message, it was an anti discrimination message. If this was a cake asserting that Black people should have equal rights and they refused to print it then of course we wouldn't stand for it, I don't see why this is any different.

In Northern Ireland, where there is no gay marriage, it is still very much a hot political issue. The law is on this guys side unfortunately.

[EEL123]

This wasn't a political message, it was an anti discrimination message. If this was a cake asserting that Black people should have equal rights and they refused to print it then of course we wouldn't stand for it, I don't see why this is any different.

Gay marriage is absolutely a political issue, and any communication relating to gay marriage is therefore a political message. Even if it was an anti-discrimination message, so what? It is wrong for the government to compel anyone to express any sort of opinion. Don't I have a right to refuse to make a communication? Why must someone be compelled to say "support gay marriage"? It doesn't cause genuine harm - certainly not harm great enough to justify a curtailment of free speech - to anyone (unless you treat free speech with such contempt that having to go to another bakery or forgo an inscription on your cake is worth throwing it by the wayside).

[Captain-Socialist]

I hope in a few years time everyone has moved on enough for things like marriage equality not to be an issue.

You think in a few years there won't be any more traditionalist Christians, Jews, Muslims and generic homophobes in the UK?

No fear.

[Afrocentric]

No. These people shouldn't be prosecuted for refusing to bake a cake; it's one thing if they refused to because they're gay and have a hatred towards gay people, it's another thing if it goes against their morals, which is why many priests refuse to perform same-sex marriages; it goes against their beliefs, not because they have a hatred of gay people (although some do have hatred towards them). Look, I have friends who are against gay marriage, and they're far from bigoted homophobes; they just have a different view on the subject and I accept that.

We as a society have to get past this idea that every religious person hates gay people and the idea of them marrying; that's not the case. We as a society have to extend respect and tolerance to each side when dealing with this issue in the future; not just the "popular" side. Too me, if we start persecuting people based on their religious views, we are setting a dangerous precedent and are no better than Adolf Hitler who did the same thing to the Jews. The challenge with all of this (and its playing out in the US right now) is drawing the line between religious freedom and equality. I get both sides of the argument, but to me, you can't have it one way or the other, you're going to have to respect the views of everybody; not just one group.

I'll close by asking you all this: Am I not entitled to the same rights as somebody else? Why should my sexuality be held against me?

Now take out the word "sexuality" and replace it with "religious views".