|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 10, 2018 22:22:34 GMT
As there are no cakes involved it is ok to disagree The bakers won a pyrrhic victory making the cake or not won't actually affect whether gay marriage becomes legal in NI which it will eventually, £200k or a £36.50 cake I know what I would choose but then I am not religious or irish. But the case wasn’t about the legality of ‘gay’ marriage in NI, or even whether the customer was a ‘gay’ or not. It was about the right of the bakers to refuse to put a message on to a cake which went against their beliefs. Surely they have the right to be able to choose what they make and sell in their business? It cannot be right for someone to be able to come in off the street and demand that they bake a cake for him and place upon it a political message with which they disagree and for them to have no right of refusal, can it? I’m sure there are plenty of other slogans which they would have refused to use which wouldn’t have caused such an outrage from the BBC, the Guardian and others but those wouldn’t fit their twisted ‘inclusivity’ agendas. Yes I know all that but this guy picked the argument to try and highlight gay marriage. A political slogan on a cake that would be gone within a week that no one would have then heard about was it worth it ?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 10, 2018 22:27:08 GMT
As there are no cakes involved it is ok to disagree The bakers won a pyrrhic victory making the cake or not won't actually affect whether gay marriage becomes legal in NI which it will eventually, £200k or a £36.50 cake I know what I would choose but then I am not religious or irish. The baker's costs were funded by a Christian charity. Well I am glad the bakery isnt out of pocket so two bunches of bald man fighting over a comb as a proxy for gay marriage. These jesus types charity hates gay marriage they are going to go full mental when they get the gender fluidity arguments.....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2018 23:50:57 GMT
Only a couple of lifters could get all het up about something like this. If I wanted a Stoke City Cake, and the baker was a Vale fan and told me to get lost I'd just think " Fuck him, I'll find another baker" but listening to this twat going on about how his rights were infringed he just says to me he went looking for an issue to be a victim of and get all upset...FUCKING SNOWFLAKE...Seriously, could you imagine this bollocks 20 years ago, what a fucking waste of money, and a tragedy that this cunt went after a hard working honest family business, what about their rights...
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 11, 2018 4:27:52 GMT
Only a couple of lifters could get all het up about something like this. If I wanted a Stoke City Cake, and the baker was a Vale fan and told me to get lost I'd just think " Fuck him, I'll find another baker" but listening to this twat going on about how his rights were infringed he just says to me he went looking for an issue to be a victim of and get all upset...FUCKING SNOWFLAKE...Seriously, could you imagine this bollocks 20 years ago, what a fucking waste of money, and a tragedy that this cunt went after a hard working honest family business, what about their rights... Whats a lifter?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 4:46:12 GMT
Only a couple of lifters could get all het up about something like this. If I wanted a Stoke City Cake, and the baker was a Vale fan and told me to get lost I'd just think " Fuck him, I'll find another baker" but listening to this twat going on about how his rights were infringed he just says to me he went looking for an issue to be a victim of and get all upset...FUCKING SNOWFLAKE...Seriously, could you imagine this bollocks 20 years ago, what a fucking waste of money, and a tragedy that this cunt went after a hard working honest family business, what about their rights... Whats a lifter? Shirt lifter.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 4:51:37 GMT
" if I knew you were bumming I'd have baked a cake, baked a cake, baked a cake.."
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 11, 2018 4:54:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 11, 2018 5:12:43 GMT
He's a bit of a smarmy twat that should be made to pay the costs. He went looking for an issue, found one and as it didn't go his way cried like a baby.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 11, 2018 5:13:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 5:21:39 GMT
Sometimes I wish it was, We had none of this victim culture we have now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 5:22:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 5:25:47 GMT
He's a bit of a smarmy twat that should be made to pay the costs. He went looking for an issue, found one and as it didn't go his way cried like a baby. Exactly. " Oh look at me everyone, the nasty homophobic baker won't bake my cake, I'm so upset and victimised"... Get a fucking grip ya big fruit cake. ( Pun intended )
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 11, 2018 5:42:19 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 11, 2018 6:19:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Oct 11, 2018 6:25:14 GMT
There was a lettuce-licker's status on my Facebook the other day- along the lines of 'the USA thinks it's still the 1940s because of it's treatment of the LGBT community'- the usual cliched bollocks. Now there's a lot to criticise the States (and UK) for, but LGBT rights isn't one of them- they've got more rights, a bigger platform and more representation than ever. If they really want to mention countries where LGBT rights are not so great, the USA is surely way down the list- but that wouldn't suit the narrative, would it? Both the UK and USA have levelled the playing field.... and rightly so. The problem for me, is that some gay people seemingly want more than equality.... they actually want superiority, a bit like certain feminists. If there's someone I utterly despise, it's Milo Yiannopoulos, but he actually nails it here, although I disagree with him on gay marriage. Two very gay blokes talking about exactly what I mention above: That was a great watch. Been saying for years "Why would gay guys want to get married," The bleached Greek obviously wants to £@#& the Yank, the amount of sledging he gives him. I do disagree with his line about gay Torys being discriminated against. I once pulled a Tory, but didn't initially realise she was. When I did, I dumped her. $#@&&ed her 1st, mind!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 8:20:35 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people. Guilty as charged your honour.
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Oct 11, 2018 8:25:44 GMT
'Mr Lee said the case had made him feel like a second-class citizen and that he was now concerned about "the implications for all of the gay community".' Ironically it's campaigners like Lee and their antics who probably make Average Joes lose a little bit of tolerance and 'roll their eyes' towards the LGBT community when previously they couldn't have given the slightest of fucks who they like to swap bodily fluids with. I'm one of them I have to say. What's his next campaign anyway- demand that his nearest Islamic Centre has a stall that sells butt-plugs? pretty much sums it up a couple of my best friends are gay, it makes no odds to me, i go out with them and we have a good time and we are still good friends, i try not to categorise people in terms of gay, straight, black etc etc except vale fans, they are shit
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 8:37:17 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people. How exactly is my view nullified...I am totally clear in my views, and they are my views, not yours, not everyone else's, it's like an opinion, technically there is no such thing as a wrong opinion, it is something that you own, it may be different to others, and may upset some self righteous sanctimonious people, but it is still YOUR opinion, and in YOUR mind it is right.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Oct 11, 2018 8:47:16 GMT
Some homosexuals are ok. We have a pair of males living across the road from us, they go about their business and lives in an ordinary way, just like the rest of us. If you didn’t know them, you wouldn’t know that they were (if you know what I mean!)
It’s the ones who go mincing and flouncing around who piss people off and provoke a reaction.
I don’t feel the need to go around showing that I’m a normal heterosexual. People take me as they find me. Some like me, some don’t and I get on with it. That’s life.
But for some, like this twat who ordered the cake, ‘normal behaviour’ isn’t good enough for them. They’ve got to be making a point, having a protest or being a outspoken member of their particular minority sect. I’ve nothing against ‘protest’ but why do it in such a way to cost everyone such a lot of money, and to put an ordinary couple of hard working people under such a spot light?
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 11, 2018 8:49:04 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people. How exactly is my view nullified...I am totally clear in my views, and they are my views, not yours, not everyone else's, it's like an opinion, technically there is no such thing as a wrong opinion, it is something that you own, it may be different to others, and may upset some self righteous sanctimonious people, but it is still YOUR opinion, and in YOUR mind it is right. Because some of the words you chose don't relate to the issue. You could have made your point effectively with different language. You are fully entitled to use words you choose to of course, but it presents your point in a different light.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 11, 2018 9:27:53 GMT
Whilst I don't think it was discrimination (outright refusal to serve one person based on beliefs, sexuality, ethnicity) as they have served the customer before and believe the court probably made the right decision, this does bring into light a low key debate currently raging regarding secularism and religion in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 11, 2018 9:43:15 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people. How exactly is my view nullified...I am totally clear in my views, and they are my views, not yours, not everyone else's, it's like an opinion, technically there is no such thing as a wrong opinion, it is something that you own, it may be different to others, and may upset some self righteous sanctimonious people, but it is still YOUR opinion, and in YOUR mind it is right. Personally I have nothing against what people do behind closed doors as Long as consent is involved My problem lies in certain sections of society telling me what I should acept What I should think What I am allowed to say Homosexuality do I agree with it I would probably say no due to religious belief Do I think people should be discriminated against because of sexuality no that is there choice or orientation What I find wrong is the millions of pounds of tax payers money being spent promoting what should remain a private matter
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 11, 2018 9:49:13 GMT
How exactly is my view nullified...I am totally clear in my views, and they are my views, not yours, not everyone else's, it's like an opinion, technically there is no such thing as a wrong opinion, it is something that you own, it may be different to others, and may upset some self righteous sanctimonious people, but it is still YOUR opinion, and in YOUR mind it is right. Personally I have nothing against what people do behind closed doors as Long as consent is involved My problem lies in certain sections of society telling me what I should acept What I should think What I am allowed to say Homosexuality do I agree with it I would probably say no due to religious belief Do I think people should be discriminated against because of sexuality no that is there choice or orientation What I find wrong is the millions of pounds of tax payers money being spent promoting what should remain a private matter All fair points, but I would counter that in our increasingly secular society, it's absolutely ridiculous that there are 26 bishops who automatically sit in the House of Lords and are paid around £7,000,000 a year for the privilege of doing so. They also directly participate in discussions and decisions that affect me and my family, directly influenced by their belief in something that I do not believe in. I think we're reaching the point where this should be removed, if it has not passed already.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 9:50:21 GMT
And for the record, I am not 100% against Gay People. I love the story line in Corrie with Sophie and the Lawyer, especially when they are snogging, however the Gay Vicar, and them pair in Emmerdale make me want to puke...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 9:51:58 GMT
The general consensus is that The Baker was right, and hopefully his business will benefit from the publicity...
|
|
|
Post by 3putts on Oct 11, 2018 10:03:04 GMT
Regardless of the ruling, your own views are somewhat inavalidated. Choosing to use terminology of a bygone era... and words which are disrespectful to gay people, does nullify your view somewhat. The phrasing you used indicate strongly your opinion is coloured emphatically by a prejudice against homosexual people. get a grip of yourself ffs
|
|
|
Post by 3putts on Oct 11, 2018 10:08:45 GMT
here in the uk we have homosexuality thrust down our throats[sic] left right and centre. every tv programme now has to have a quota and they even demand the right now to have babies, er there is a very simple way of having a baby if that's what you want but no we the taxpayers have to pay so the queers can have their "perfect families" we even had the scots mp ruth Davidson walking hand in hand with her gf showing signs of her bump awww aint it sweet. activists like peter thatchel claim that 10% of the population are gay, bullshit. I loved that photo of the ryder cup team celebrating their success with their wives and gf not a lifter in sight.,
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 11, 2018 10:25:05 GMT
here in the uk we have homosexuality thrust down our throats[sic] left right and centre. every tv programme now has to have a quota and they even demand the right now to have babies, er there is a very simple way of having a baby if that's what you want but no we the taxpayers have to pay so the queers can have their "perfect families" we even had the scots mp ruth Davidson walking hand in hand with her gf showing signs of her bump awww aint it sweet. activists like peter thatchel claim that 10% of the population are gay, bullshit. I loved that photo of the ryder cup team celebrating their success with their wives and gf not a lifter in sight., I'd rather pay for a "perfect queer family" that is loving, together and provides a child with a solid foundation, than a broken hetero relationship. I don't understand how it can make you so angry. What difference would it have made if one of the golfers was gay for goodness sake, would it make him any less of a golfer, or ruin Europe's fantastic win? Of course not.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Oct 11, 2018 10:46:52 GMT
here in the uk we have homosexuality thrust down our throats[sic] left right and centre. every tv programme now has to have a quota and they even demand the right now to have babies, er there is a very simple way of having a baby if that's what you want but no we the taxpayers have to pay so the queers can have their "perfect families" we even had the scots mp ruth Davidson walking hand in hand with her gf showing signs of her bump awww aint it sweet. activists like peter thatchel claim that 10% of the population are gay, bullshit. I loved that photo of the ryder cup team celebrating their success with their wives and gf not a lifter in sight., I'd rather pay for a "perfect queer family" that is loving, together and provides a child with a solid foundation, than a broken hetero relationship. I don't understand how it can make you so angry. What difference would it have made if one of the golfers was gay for goodness sake, would it make him any less of a golfer, or ruin Europe's fantastic win? Of course not. I think the point was that the BBC, Guardian and others would have us believe that homosexuality and trans, ‘non gender’ existence is much more widespread than it actually is. It might be widespread within the bubbles that these luvvies exist, but to most of us it is a minor, rarely encountered deviance to normality. And, for what it’s worth, bringing children up in an environment of two ‘loving males’ is likely to do them no favours in the long run once they start getting bullied and the piss taken out of them at school. They would, in my opinion, be better bought up by a normal heterosexual couple who may have the odd row or problem between themselves which the sprog will learn from and benefit from as they go through their educational and working lives.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 11, 2018 11:02:24 GMT
I'd rather pay for a "perfect queer family" that is loving, together and provides a child with a solid foundation, than a broken hetero relationship. I don't understand how it can make you so angry. What difference would it have made if one of the golfers was gay for goodness sake, would it make him any less of a golfer, or ruin Europe's fantastic win? Of course not. I think the point was that the BBC, Guardian and others would have us believe that homosexuality and trans, ‘non gender’ existence is much more widespread than it actually is. It might be widespread within the bubbles that these luvvies exist, but to most of us it is a minor, rarely encountered deviance to normality. And, for what it’s worth, bringing children up in an environment of two ‘loving males’ is likely to do them no favours in the long run once they start getting bullied and the piss taken out of them at school. They would, in my opinion, be better bought up by a normal heterosexual couple who may have the odd row or problem between themselves which the sprog will learn from and benefit from as they go through their educational and working lives. So why not just say that then? Why use words such as "queer" which just smack of a personalised bitterness/fear/hatred towards a community that for the most part don't participate in events such as those surrounding this whole cake debacle. In reality, how does gay marriage/right to have children negatively impact anyone heterosexual significantly on a personal level? Other than when some officious gits take it too far....but that's not exclusive to homosexual people. There's no evidence to suggest that kids raised by two people of the same gender are any different or less successful than that of their peers. Several Meta-analyses of studies show this quite clearly. I'm not talking about the odd row anyway, I'm talking about the Jeremy Kyle culture of broken homes and a mother having 5 children all by different fathers, how is that not damaging? But two men raising a single child somehow is?
|
|