Thread: Nancy boys can have their cake and eat it

Originally Posted by taxexile

Dont be such an arse. you are another one of those "if you dont agree with my point of view you must be silly/ill informed/from another planet" sorts.

Those two could have gone to any number of bakers for their right-on cake, but no, they chose a bakery that they knew was run by people who would have a problem with their request, and in doing so, showed them none of the respect that they aggressively demand from others, and had no consideration for those peoples views, they purposely and quite unnecessarily provoked them.

If you are so well informed can you let us know how you know the bakery was deliberately chosen because the owners would have a problem with the request? Nobody but you has claimed that. What about the fact that the order was initially accepted and money taken. Tax. I have a strong feeling that your outrage may have led to some false assumptions.

To those wittering on about Muslims, the same laws apply to them. Perhaps one of you would care to test this? I agree that the law should be applied equally.

it is possible that the bakery was not as i said, targeted.

but that really makes no difference. they should have respected the views of the owner, who has confirmed he is not anti-gay, just anti gay marriage according to his christian beliefs, and in a spirit of "oh OK then, we didnt mean to offend you, sorry" gone elsewhere for their cake.

their diva act of being so hurt and so offended by the offer of the refund of the money and the refusal to print the message just doesn't wash. they are making a scene, and really have no real cause to do so.

someone doesnt agree with gay marriage, so fucking what. live with it.

hard to feel any sympathy for people like that, black white gay or whatever.

they really are a bunch of big girls blouses. making trouble out of nothing.

Originally Posted by taxexile

it is possible that the bakery was not as i said, targeted.

but that really makes no difference. they should have respected the views of the owner, who has confirmed he is not anti-gay, just anti gay marriage according to his christian beliefs, and in a spirit of "oh OK then, we didnt mean to offend you, sorry" gone elsewhere for their cake.

their diva act of being so hurt and so offended by the offer of the refund of the money and the refusal to print the message just doesn't wash. they are making a scene, and really have no real cause to do so.

someone doesnt agree with gay marriage, so fucking what. live with it.

hard to feel any sympathy for people like that, black white gay or whatever.

they really are a bunch of big girls blouses. making trouble out of nothing.

There is a reason for antidiscrimination laws. So that people can't just pick on people they don't like for the sake of it.

It's not difficult.

Perhaps if you were in a minority that constantly faced discrimination in the past, you'd feel differently.

As for the baker, Jesus preached tolerance and forgiveness, not "I'm not making you a cake, you pair of poofs".

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7:12

Perhaps if you were in a minority that constantly faced discrimination in the past, you'd feel differently.

i am a member of a minority group. i was discriminated against at school.

i would much rather know who was against me than not, and when i suffered discrimination i just got on with it. no complaints, no tears, no reprisals. but i knew who was discriminating against me, and that was the important thing, because then i knew there would be no false friendships and no forced acceptance. i knew exactly where i stood with people.

unlike today, when you dont really know what people are really thinking or feeling. nobody dares publicise their feelings in case of persecution or vilification.

better to have people accept me because they want to, rather than because they have been forced to by legislation.

Jesus preached tolerance and forgiveness, not "I'm not making you a cake, you pair of poofs".

dont be a fool.

they never expressed homophobic sentiments at all, they saidit would go against their conscience to put a pro gay marriage slogan on the cake because it went against their christian beliefs regarding marriage and by printing that message they felt as if they would be promoting gay marriage.
it is the christians who are being persecuted here, not the gays.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7:12

Never had you pegged as closet Jesus wheezer Harry! I'll see your Matthew and raise you a bit of proper bible Old Testament learnin...

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them

Leviticus 20:13

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7:12

Never had you pegged as closet Jesus wheezer Harry! I'll see your Matthew and raise you a bit of proper bible Old Testament learnin...

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them

Leviticus 20:13

Christians will be along shortly to tell you that the Old Testament is not really Christian, it's Jewish - and it has been updated by the New Testament - which itself has been updated or superseded by anti-discrimination laws.

They can vote for what the fucking hell they like Bob, and they can marry Paddy Mcgintys goat and fuck its hairy arse all night long for all I care. Nobody is denying them that right.

But humiliating and forcing those Christians to accept and promote what they genuinely believe to be wrong is an abomination, and as a civilised society, they should be ashamed of themselves.

Surely if supporting same-sex marriage is a protected political opinion, then so is supporting traditional marriage, yet the commission clearly favours one view over another and is prepared to litigate to prove its silly point.

Is the Commission seriously saying that all business owners have to be willing to promote every political cause or campaign, no matter how much they disagree with it? Does a printer have no right to refuse to print posters for the BNP or Islamic State?

Its political correctness gone mad, its the Spanish Inquisition minus the thumbscrews and faggots .... oops that word again. Bending over backwards to placate the increasingly untouchable gay lobby.

Originally Posted by taxexile

Bending over backwards to placate the increasingly untouchable gay lobby.

...or bending over forwards

Originally Posted by taxexile

It would be interesting if this ruling was tested in a Muslim owned business.
I use the example of Muslims, because they, more than any other, are defined by their religious beliefs.

District Judge Isobel Brownlie said although the bakers were entitled to their religious beliefs, implementing them at work impinged on others’ rights.

"The defendants have unlawfully discriminated against the plaintiff on grounds of sexual discrimination," she added.

"This is direct discrimination for which there can be no justification."

Does this mean that Muslims cannot take time off from work to pray? because it means that others will have to do extra work to cover for them, or Jews take leave for their New Year holidays, or that Muslims cannot refuse to work on the pork counter or alcohol displays at Tescos?

Does any of that amount to sexual discrimination of others?

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7:12

Never had you pegged as closet Jesus wheezer Harry! I'll see your Matthew and raise you a bit of proper bible Old Testament learnin...

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them

Leviticus 20:13

Well that one's easy to answer.

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

^ Perfect.

Does any of that amount to sexual discrimination of others?

a completely irrelevant comment

District Judge Isobel Brownlie said although the bakers were entitled to their religious beliefs, implementing them at work impinged on others’ rights.

my question about Muslims is in regard to whether they would be entitled to implement their religious beliefs in their place of work should those beliefs result in discrimination against others, e.g. the mother who wants a birthday card for her daughter with a picture of a pig on it or a comment that goes against Muslim beliefs.

Originally Posted by taxexile

my question about Muslims is in regard to whether they would be entitled to implement their religious beliefs in their place of work should those beliefs result in discrimination against others, e.g. the mother who wants a birthday card for her daughter with a picture of a pig on it or a comment that goes against Muslim beliefs.

^ Already answered by DrBob..

Originally Posted by DrB0b

To those wittering on about Muslims, the same laws apply to them. Perhaps one of you would care to test this? I agree that the law should be applied equally.

Originally Posted by taxexile

Does any of that amount to sexual discrimination of others?

a completely irrelevant comment

District Judge Isobel Brownlie said although the bakers were entitled to their religious beliefs, implementing them at work impinged on others’ rights.

my question about Muslims is in regard to whether they would be entitled to implement their religious beliefs in their place of work should those beliefs result in discrimination against others, e.g. the mother who wants a birthday card for her daughter with a picture of a pig on it or a comment that goes against Muslim beliefs.

It's very relevant.

Why did you leave out part of what I quoted, it's right underneath your selected quote:

District Judge Isobel Brownlie said although the bakers were entitled to their religious beliefs, implementing them at work impinged on others’ rights.

"The defendants have unlawfully discriminated against the plaintiff on grounds of sexual discrimination," she added.

Now, let's not be disingenuous and deliberately distort.

Let me ask you:
Which 'rights' would be infringed by a shop's refusal to print a pig on a birthday card?

Compare apples with apples.

Just to clarify, before some angry halfwits make assumptions about my position and personal life:

I disagree with the court's decision.
Given the choice of shops which would gladly have fulfilled the order, I'd say the shopowners' religious conscience weights more than the gay couple's complaint.

Hardly a reason to go on a posting rampage against "nancy boys", and no excuse for the customary homophobic/Islamophobic drivel by the usual suspects.

Originally Posted by Stinky

Politely decline and go about my business?

and then when you felt his hot breath on the back of your neck ???


Naaa FFS man up kick him in the nads

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

Originally Posted by Stinky

Politely decline and go about my business?

and then when you felt his hot breath on the back of your neck ???

If my personal space were invaded in such an unwelcome way that would kind of merit a "Fukorff Kunt!"

So, all this hateful ranting and raving just because you were accosted in a public toilet during your youth, nigel? Have you considered a few therapy sessions to get it out of your system?

I was once accosted in a pub toilet by a female bodybuilder, can't say as I put up much of a fight as it goes.

Have some sympathy for Nigel. Rick Thai had a similar experience and look how he ended up!

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

Is this one you ordered for yourself and your trucker mates?
Did you have it made in a conservative Christian bakery, if I may ask?

Glad to say my son grew up non PC to

Some bender tried a wrong move in the Sandbach northbound bogs one day ,, think that poof is still eating his dinner through a straw

Anyway now we've outta a few of the ex TV poofs

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Do you wait outside gay pubs on a Friday night to bond with other 'real men' through some gay bashing, nige?

Just asking like, I appreciate your valuable contributions, even if they are somewhat rustic and consist of little more than slurs. It's nice to get an insight into the workings of such limited in scope, yet frank and bold minds which were formed in the 50s, I'd guess?, and never changed since.