I wasn’t going to blog on this topic as Harry McAvinchey has already done a fine article on the topic. But having watched the hoo-ha on BBC’s The View last night, I feel the need to try to get some clarity on it, for myself if no one else.
On the face of it, Caitriona Ruane and and the young man representing gays have a a strong point. Here we have a bakery offering its services to the public. Then a gay couple approach them, ask for a particular kind of wedding cake and they’re refused. A pretty cut-and-dried case, you’d say, with echoes of the civil rights movement in the US during the 1960s: if you’re black you’re not going to be served/allowed to attend this school/ whatever.
But that’s to ignore one vital element: on top of the cake, beside Bert and Ernie in a semi-cuddle, were to be the words ‘Support Gay Marriage’. Mmm. So the cake makers, who are serious Christians, were being asked to produce a message that runs counter to their religious convictions. I know it’s a daft comparison but there are parallels: if the cake people had been asked to spell out the message “There is no god”, I think most of us would have said that was an icing too far. Asking Christians to effectively encourage non-belief would be ludicrous.
Or let’s look at it politically, which would probably be easier in some respects. Supposing I went to a staunch member of the DUP who happened to be in the bakery business and asked them to depict an Irish tricolour, with above it the words “Tiocfaidh ár lá”: do you think they’d be likely to comply? Hardly. And I’d support them in their opposition, just as I wouldn’t like to be a baker and approached to produce a cake showing the Union flag and above it the words “Home Rule is Rome Rule” or “Rule Brittania” for that matter.
In fact there are echoes of poppy-wearing here. No one is saying (I hope) that people haven’t every right to wear the poppy. But equally, to pressure TV presenters into wearing it, as virtually all the TV channels appear to have been successful in doing, is to insist they act hypocritically and embrace a cause towards which at best they have no affection and at worst they have feelings of hostility.
I can see, as they say, where Nigel Dodds, Fr Tim Bartlett and the gay community are coming from. But I still believe it’s a case of asking people to produce, not just a cake, but a message that they are in conscientious objection to. I think that’s a layer of icing too far. The cake company should be allowed to politely decline.
As we know a boxing ring is square in shape. Two of the opposite corner posts are blue and red, whereas the other two are white. The neutral referee usually occupies a white corner. It would appear that efforts to resolve this matter amicably and politely have been in vain. Given the deadlock, it appears that a decision will be required in order to determine if the company in question has not complied with Equality Legislation.
What’s the difference between a Christian baker and a Christian B&B owner? Surely that battle has been fought and lost?
Very little difference I would imagine, we’ll find out though. The cynic in me says Ashers won’t do too badly out of this. A lot of businesses would kill for this publicity…
A rare occasion indeed, Jude, I disagree with your goodself. Businesses are there to provide goods and services, by providing these goods and services they are not endorsing any religious or political messages, it’s simply business. Their personal opinions can’t and shouldn’t come into it – where does that stop ?
Open and shut case for me. I do confess, I’m going to enjoy the ultra conservative wings of our society getting clipped.
Just as you should be allowed to split the infinitive.
A B&B host here lost a court case here over a refusal to accommodate two males who had made a booking. It’s not a question of degree; your bakery was practising illegal discrimination against a section of its custom and were plainly wrong to do so.
Equality for all will not be realised while crude behaviour of this kind is accepted.
Sadly, and to be imperfectly straight about it, what Perkie knows about being Gay and the Gay Lifestyle (apart from the rather aptly named Mr. G. Byrne who has contributed so generously to the gaiety of the West British colony despite his unfortunate bankruptcies which appear to be gathering apace, alas) one could probably write down on the back of an ancient Irish vellum envelope. Or, rather, the front of one.
He gladly fesses up to knowing just as little about the topic as he would, say, about the fishing of brown trout or even, the wearing of brown scapulars.
What he does know, however, is that he is fully behind the verdict of the redoubtable Dowager Lady Trouser-Coffe in Regency Days who, when asked for her opinion of the Backgammon Players, replied in the manner haughty:
-One is afraid one is not at all familiar with the rather rude term you choose to employ. But, if perchance, you are referring to the Navigators of the Windward Passage then one’s firm opinion is as follows: one could not care a fig for what they might choose to get up to in the privacy of their own boudoirs just as long as they do not do it in the streets and frighten the horses.
Touche, Lady T-C, says PW.
Alas, there is quite an alarming (in the positive sense !) number of quadrupeds currently in the process of being scared stiff in the streets broad and narrow of the dirty old town of Miss Molly. That would be, Miss Molly Malone, the role model of many a wheelbarrower of borrowed money from the studios of RTE. Methinks indeed that the Free Southern Stateen is rather tilting more of late in the erect direction of Sodom rather than Begorrah.
It is all expected to reach a climax in the purlieus of the National Cathedral of St. Patrick’s when the annual Remembrance Day performance of ‘A Midwinter Night’s Wet Dream’ is celebrated. This being a particularly poignant year, the first of four centenaries of the Great Donkey Derby 14-18, Tuesday cannot come quickly enough for proud-to-wear-a-poppy Perkie as he is on tenterhooks to discover who will be playing the part of the most illustrious quadruped of them all, the role model for Donkey in Gregory Shrekland, no less: the Donkey called Bottom.
Bottom, the modern day Wolf Tone, will lead the commemorative procession from the top of the hill at Christchurch of Ireland and strut his booty all the way down to the b. of the hill, where St. Patrick’s is located, in his unforgettable Let-them-eat-Cakewalk to the rapturous though restrained applause of all the Bert and Ernies in attendance.
Two C of I Cathedrals, cheek by jowl, in a one-horse Protestant town, is not a bad return. Usury or lose it, as the oval-balled brigade do so pithily put it. On the steps of St. Patrick’s Bottom, will be met by The O’Morchoe (a surname morphed from Murphy), the Five Star General Dogsbody of the British Legion in the FSS, who will have his trusty mascot, the regimental wolfhound called Tiny, on a lead.
Tiny, which has been a little distempered of late, one understands, so it is hoped he does not choose to emit a few of his ripe trouser coughs (canine equiv) for which he is so justifiably renowned during the more solemn moments of what should be such a sanctimonious occasion. Trigger-fingers crossed.
On a linguistic note: ‘Beirt’ signifies ‘ a pair of people’ in the lingua franca of the leprechaun, while ‘Eile’ means ‘another’. It was the traditional signal for the ancient druids to click their fingers to call forth another couple be joined in holy wedlock (oops! almost wrote ‘headlock’ !) on the altar of matrimony: ‘Beirt Eile’. These days, south of the Black Pig’s Dyke, it is more likely to be ‘Bert and Ernie’ than ‘Beirt agus Ella’. More Liliputian than Leprechaun.
It is, one might say, rather easier to be Gay than Gaelic in the Free Southern Stateen these mornings, noons, afternoons, evenings and nights with the advent of the 24/7 news outlets and outing lets. To, erm, put it another way, a tad easier to be a dickey-bowed Donal Og Cusack that, say, a shillelagh-wielding Citzen Cusack so exquisitely diced and iced in the pro-Semitic pages of Ulysses, that product of a Old Belvederean.
Coincidentally, there was an immensely poignant programme on RTE earlier this week, featuring an Old Belvederean who was not unacquainted with either money or matrimony or, indeed, Monet himself, in his hey-day. One refers, poignantly, to (gulp) Sir AJF O’Reilly now alas in his no-hay day.
And to think his horses had their very hay buttered in his hey-day . Perkie’s inner empathiser alas was so traumatised by this intensely poignant programme that he is currently receiving post-traumatic stress counseling at the moment, going forward.
Goddess alone know when he will be able to suffinciently in the pink to be able to have a cake with pink icing ordered and delivered, c/o Poste Restante, The Arches, Third Lock, Royal Canal, Dublin 1.
And bearing the good-will inscription: ‘Egg-chasing Ego-trippers have Leather Balls !’.
Its very VERY rare I would agree with DUP’s Nigel Dodds (im getting scared…) but I agree with him on this occasion. This wasn’t a case where gay people went in to buy a bun and sandwiches for their lunch and they were turned away simply because they were gay, they went in and asked for a cake and a particular message to be put on this cake and they were declined due to the bakeries religious views on same sex marriage, which they have every right in doing. The person who wanted the cake could’ve easily have found a nearby Bakery who would have had no issue with making this cake because business is business.
When we say “everyone has rights”, that means EVERYONE, not just gay people, not just immigrants, not just minorities, etc but also the majority, also Christians, etc And people with religious views shouldn’t be forced to do something that conflicts with their views.
Again, this would’ve been a different story if a gay person was simply turned away and refused service because they are gay but that’s not the case here.
Right on, Jude. I support the right for gay folk to get married 100%. However, I also support the right of a private business person to refuse to serve anyone 100%. Values and the evolution of values are up to a community. If folks believe that a particular business is being run counter to their beliefs they have a right not to spend their money at that establishment. If the business owner’s actions become that misaligned with the community they serve they will either have to close or move. No need for government agents or agencies to be involved unless their is violence.
So certain people go to certain shops while certain other people go to certain other shops… All a bit 1980s S.Africa.
That was a state forcing apartheid. Completely different…as a state has no right to tell the individual what to believe. It can offer education but states rarely do that without propaganda. A person still has a right to their own beliefs whether we like them or not. As long as it is privately owned property, what right does another individual have to demand service from another free individual. If we call ourselves a free people, we must allow others who have contradictory views the same liberty. Respect for private property, respect for individual rights, respect for dissent…
As I wuz saying to Harry, marriage is a contract between male and female and, normally, kids.
In Old Testament times the woman could be exchanged if she did not produce, or a second wife taken.
Abraham is the classic case.
But who’s to stop anyone forming any other kind of bond?
Heck, most men get on best with their dogs!
But is a legal document required?
Well, if they don’t get on the SPCA will sort out the male human.
Or a hospital will.
Why should anyone outside the formal bond desired be required to approve or disapprove of it?
Heck, businesses — including bakers — should be allowed to make bonds of their choosing with customers of their choosing, surely?
They can’t be expected to stock up on furry animals and such beyond the black-suited plastic groom and the flaring white dress of a plastic bride, surely?
A kids’ party baker would have a more extensive range of thing-mes to plonk on, including clowns (always a favourite) and smiling puppies.
And why not, in this case, locate a gay baker — I’ve met them far from the scene of the crime!
Bakers have much of a right to choose customers as others have to choose partners, surely?
This one takes the cake!
They wanted a small compensation, and an apology!!!!
I had two gay male friends they had been in a relationship for years. One was made redundant, he played “the only gay in the village ” card and consequently ended up loosing his job. Totally arrogant ignorant and played his cards completely wrong.
When later after loosing his job, he went on the sick, played the old stressed card.
Turns out he claimed housing benefit, and guess what his partner lover call him what you will, became his landlord.
Nothing to learn eh, whatever suits, I have no redress or opinion on gays. I just thank God I am totally heterosexual, I think these people should practice being a little less gay.
They are always putting it in your face, if it’s not gay pride, then its this bakery incident or the bed and breakfast scenario.
Be quiet. Go about your business, we don’t want to know your gay, keep it to yourself, you don’t see straight people demonstrating they are gay.
Norma
What is “totally heterosexual”?
Is there a “nana Royle” type heterosexual where your are straight all year but you allow yourself a wee “homosexual flinging” at Christmas?
Sorry that should have read straight.
Good grief i agree with Jude what next the rapture?
Still waiting for my pint Jude coming up to Christmas my diary quickly fills up you know
I’m afraid you simply can’t just have your cake and eat it in this context.If you open a shop on the high street , your private views should be kept out of it.You may not like or enjoy the personal customs of your potential customers but if you advertise a service and a customer makes a perfectly legal request you can’t pick and choose. You could of course advertise the fact that it was against your religion to serve anyone wearing houndstooth trousers and brown brogues or whatever and leave it up to the law to decide if you were sane or not.
Or , as I’ve said elsewhere , you could simply stop this illustrating cake service at your shop and save yourself a whole lot of hassle.It only takes a little wit to keep on the straight and narrow. Look what happened to the zealots who tried to stop the rest of us watching a play earlier in the year. Of course there are ups and downs to this little farce. the shop is getting some incredible free advertising and will doubtless accrue a lot of new supporters >It may of course lose a whole tranche of open-minded people who would prefer people to live and let live and allow married couples of whatever sex a little peace.
Agree with you 100% Paddykool. A little bit of common sense applied might have sorted the whole thing. The message on the cake wasn’t exactly offensive! I am sure if the cake had been made and decorated it would not need to be displayed in the front window so who would have know to the difference?
What’s going on here then? Jude disagreeing with Catriona, neil agreeing with Jude, Ryan agreeing with Nigel Dodds, Cal disagreeing with Jude, Norma…just being Norma.
We are through the looking glass here people.
You forgot that I was agreeing by default with Nigel also…I’ll have to check my pill intake again…