Baker backed by UK court. (page 5)

waton

Right! Artist are allowed a wide range of choices. Think of the one that build in a remotely controlled shredder in that million $ painting! That cake order too was a latent booby trap.

Xanthippe

The point is, you cannot

Precisely the point I was making Simon, even though LUHE has twice asserted you can legally refuse to serve someone because they are gay and show them the door.

As you say and as I said first, you cannot. I was making no comment on whether or not the legislation is ill-conceived, simply that LUHE does not understand British law but as usual he has buggered off when shown to be wrong.

LoveUniHateExams

even though LUHE has twice asserted you can legally refuse to serve someone because they are gay and show them the door - I asserted no such thing.

I simply stated the fact that if a person owns the premises - in fact, any building - that person can order any and all members of the public off the premises, without needing to give a reason.

If a customer walked into a restaurant with their same-sex partner and ordered something to eat ... then the owner said "leave now, we don't serve gays!" - that would be illegal because of the laws you presumably are referring to.

My understanding of British legislation is such that I can have meaningful participation in these kinds of threads.

Thank you.

Simon

Precisely the point I was making Simon, even though LUHE has twice asserted you can legally refuse to serve someone because they are gay and show them the door.

No, you can refuse to serve them if you have a valid reason - such as them violating a dress code that applies to everyone. But the only reason to know if someone coming in to buy something is gay is if they tell you and the only reason to do that is they are activists intentionally trying to provoke an issue.

You can have your own standards within your store as long as they are applied equally. I may not want people coming in with face-masks and that would apply to motorcycle helmets, antifa thugs or muslim female-abuse-bags.

No discrimination.

You should be able to refuse to provide your custom services to anyone for any reason you want. No one can claim a right to your labor.

Wild_Thing

Normally, I would say... let people vote with their money. If the general public doesn't like how somebody conducts business with their other customers, don't ever go there; tell your friends not to go there. They will put themselves out of business by their own behavior.

Where this kind of situation gets sticky is determining where personally expression of personal belief and violation of civil rights start to impede on each other.

Yes, the owner should be allowed to practice and express their personal beliefs.

Yes, citizens should be able to walk into any business and receive service that doesn't discriminate against their race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Whose rights are greater?

There's really no good answer go satisfy everybody. The courts have wavered back and forth on whose rights are more important for a very long time. It will interesting to see where the court of public opinion stands on this issue 20 years from now.

Personally, I think civil rights should always win out. Opinions and beliefs can be changed. You can't change what you were born with (race, gender, sexual orientation).

Simon

I think civil rights should always win out. Opinions and beliefs can be changed. You can't change what you were born with (race, gender, sexual orientation).

I think race and gender should win - no one can typically change or hide those. You can't refuse to serve women or black people.

I don't think sexual orientation or religion should be protected in any way. They should both be kept private and it's personal choice if anyone wants to provide a service or not based on their beliefs.

Wild_Thing

You think sexual orientation is a choice that can be changed? I don't think I've heard anybody personally share that belief with me since the 80s.

Just wondering, do you also support camps or counseling programs that try to change people's sexual orientation?

LoveUniHateExams

You think sexual orientation is a choice that can be changed? - no, I don't think Simon or anyone on this forum is claiming that.

Sexual orientation is a phenomenon that can be chosen to be expressed or not.

Let's not forget that the UK baker's objection was not about sexual orientation, rather, it was concerning same-sex marriage (a choice).

Simon

You think sexual orientation is a choice that can be changed? I don't think I've heard anybody personally share that belief with me since the 80s.

Just wondering, do you also support camps or counseling programs that try to change people's sexual orientation?

That's the 2nd time you've completely "misunderstood" what someone has said in this thread and you're doing it on another one so you're either a bit of a dumb fucker or else intentionally coming up with BS because you can't argue the point.

I'm saying that anyone announcing their sexuality when buying a cake is an idiot who's doing it for attention / effect / a scene / monetary shakedown.

Baker backed by UK court.

Share this