Posted on 02/02/2016 8:11:22 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Like most gay and equality campaigners, I initially condemned the Christian-run Ashers Bakery in Belfast over its refusal to produce a cake with a pro-gay marriage slogan for a gay customer, Gareth Lee. I supported his legal claim against Ashers and the subsequent verdict -- the bakery was found guilty of discrimination last year. Now, two days before the case goes to appeal, I have changed my mind. Much as I wish to defend the gay community, I also want to defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion.
The saga began in 2014 when the bakery said it was not willing to ice a cake with the words "support gay marriage" and the logo of the equality group Queer Space, claiming the message was contrary to its Christian beliefs. This struck many of us as anti-gay discrimination based on religious-inspired homophobic prejudice. Ashers believes that the relationships of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people are wrong and should not be eligible for the status of marriage. They translated these beliefs into action and declined to make the cake. Ashers would have decorated a cake with a message celebrating traditional heterosexual marriage and promoting a Christian organisation. Surely this was an example of clear-cut anti-gay discrimination?
The ‘gay cake' ruling is a victory for equality in Northern Ireland
Gareth Lee's legal case against Ashers was backed by the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland. It argued that the bakery's actions breached Northern Ireland's Equality Act and Fair Employment and Treatment Order, which prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services on the respective grounds of sexual orientation and political opinion. Last May a Belfast court found Ashers guilty of discrimination on both grounds, ordering it to pay Lee £500 compensation.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
$135,000. Outrageous. I miss the days of being able to hang a sign that says, "We reserve the right to refuse business for any reason" and have that stick. Being coerced by the government to provide a service that you have no desire to provide (nor reap the financial reward from providing) is simply wrong. Being fined for refusing the service is over the top. The "customers" should have sought another merchant willing to provide the service instead of seeking an opportunity to enrich themselves using phony tort law and invented offense and hurt feelings.
It is this kind of legal BS that keeps me working as a W2 employee instead of running my own business. Government regulations are simply too intrusive to make that even slightly appealing.
If anyone ever demands that I make them a gay quilt then I hope they don’t mind if I drape it over their casket.
Jesus never ate poop either but there are some things you do not have to do to know it is wrong.
Is a gay cake when two cakes of the same flavor mix together?
You are WRONG.
Commerce is a form of speech and it should be protected every bit as much as any other expression.
I make quilts that benefit a women’s shelter and that’s both commerce and my expression of my deeply held conviction that a women’s shelter is a worthy thing to support.
If I open a Christian bakery with the intent to make Christian-themed wedding cakes then anyone who tries to force me to bake anything else does so at the violation of my right to express myself via my chosen vocation.
Gun makers these days are clearly making an expression of speech via their commerce and if anyone is making an expression of speech via their commerce it’s certainly the broadcast media.
So if gays can force someone to bake them a cake because commerce isn’t protected speech then why can’t the gays also force a Christian programmer to broadcast pro-gay advertising or pro-gay content?
The trouble is, liberals respond to that argument by pointing out other Old Testament laws that Christians don’t follow anymore. Like women have to cover their heads, women can’t talk in church, certain offenders have to be stoned to death, you can’t mix two different fabrics, etc. Might be better to point out the New Testament verses condemning homosexuality, and how Paul was never corrected or told to change his preaching about it. Also, when Jesus talked about marriage, he spoke of a man and his wife. He never mentioned two men or two women.
Just a thought.
I don't think this fellow claims to be a Christian - just a pro-Sodomite. So it is not surprising that he has not read the Bible and just parrots catch phrases he has heard from others. Someone with a nodding acquaintance with the Bible would understand that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Word made flesh, and His Will and works were in complete agreement with God the Father as well as God the Holy Spirit. And as God makes it clear in the Old and New Testaments (Leviticus 18, the Sodom and Gomorrah dust up, 1 Corinthians 6, etc) - Homosexuality is a sin. And, although merciful (as is God the Father and God the Holy Ghost), our Lord Jesus is clear - go and sin no more. We may stumble, but if sin is a lifestyle - it will lead one to hell.
But I give the writer credit for recognizing that he was wrong for originally supporting that the Ashers' should be forced to participate in an event that is an abomination to their beliefs.
condemned homosexuality, and discrimination is not a Christian value. Ashers’ religious justifications are, to my mind, theologically unsound.â€
God condemns homosexual behavior. He certainly does too. Not on this earth but on the day of judgement, the earth is not Gods kingdom. These journalists come along and state their opinions as if they are God’s Word then wrap it up by disclaiming their uneducated opinion
Discrimination. What is he talking about?
Discernment, refusal, not engaging in or contributing to tempting or sinful behavior, turning away from scandal, not contributing to delinquency
These are Christian values. What does this writer know about Christian values. What gives him the right to declare what Christian values are or are not?
It all died, IMO, here in the US, during the 60’s.
Instead of using ridicule and market pressure, (some) people turned to the govt; whom knows nothing BUT force to get its way.
Course, today, we have segregation in all but name, but the tyranny lives on (with each ‘extension’ of the unlawful acts of Congress): inner-city vs. ‘burgs, BET, XYZ Caucus. Hell, it’s even across gender-lines (ala Curves).
But govt only enforces that which furthers its increase of power and intimidation, never impartial and never w/out an iron fist. A deal w/ the devil was made.
“Ashers’ religious justifications are, to my mind, theologically unsound.”
Unless he is the “Pope” of their denomination (if they even belong to one), his theological opinion is irrelevant.
You vill bake ze cake und you vill like it!!!!
That’s well put. I’ll remember that next time a liberal taunts me with, “But you don’t obey this or that law in the OT!”
Just wait ‘til the Gaystapo is through with this guy’s “re-education.”
#bakethecake
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.