Get the App

Newsvoice isn't just another news site. It's crowdsourced and democratized. We move the power over the news to you. Join the movement by downloading the app.
LEARN MORE GET THE APP
Comments

S Richbell 1 weeks
As a gay man I'm pleased with this ruling. As no one should be forced to do or say anything they don't agree with because that would not be freedom but a dictatorship.
Joseph Devivo 1 weeks
very well said.
Voin 1 weeks
Thank you. Someone who hasn't forgotten the concept of "live and let live"
Chase 1 weeks
Absolutely. To look at it from another perspective and to give an idea of the kind of precendence this case losing could have set, imagine the Westborough Baptist Church suing a gay owner of a custom shirt shop to have their favorite slogan (We all know the one) printed on T-shirts.

Chris Conavay 1 weeks
Best news I've heard today! Well, so far at least

Watheverable GRAMPS 1 weeks
Hopefully they'll find a Halal bakery that will fulfill their needs!
James Alexander 1 weeks
That would be an awkward piece of journalism for some writers! Wonder which “victim” would get the support of the media
S Richbell 1 weeks
Stephen Crowder did a piece where he posed as a gay man and went to Muslim Bakerys and asked them to bake a same sex cake https://youtu.be/RgWIhYAtan4
DKO 1 weeks
Had the decision turned out differently, the would be a sudden increase of cakes with "manji" symbols from Jewish bakeries, and bearded men with towels on their heads from Muslim bakeries.

Christopher Harbutt 1 weeks
It’s simple, you don’t have a right to someone else’s labor.
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
Even if you have their going rate in hand
Simon Ranson 1 weeks
Jackie, you can't force people to endource your political slogans
DKO 1 weeks
Same thing with the american bakery case; you can walk into the store and buy any existing cake. You can't force the baker to create a custom cake.

Voin 1 weeks
Holy shit, the UK actually ruled on the side of sanity, justice, and non-authoritarianism. What timeline did I wake up in this morning?

Voin 1 weeks
The Regressive Left: "you should be tolerant of everyone, yay!"🌈 Also the Regressive Left: "we're going to persecute you with purity test and drag you through court for WrongThink"
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
There you are with your straw man leftist again. If you're going to attack people attack specific people. For example name a Leftist other than the defendant who didn't think this was a bad idea
Voin 1 weeks
note the qualifier "Regressive" in front of "Left" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
ehhhhhh... that's fair. my point is that you're being hostile towards a very small group of people that as a far as I know aren't even present on this app to properly refute you. but I guess thanks for using regressive lol

Simon Ranson 1 weeks
Just like they wouldn't be forced to bake a pro-tory or pro-corbyn cake. Finally some justice in the UK.

Voin 1 weeks
Gayness is like having a penis. It's fine to have it & be proud of it, but if you whip it out in public and start shoving it down people's throats, we're gonna have a problem.
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
The Bible tells you not to lay down with another man. How the f does 2 other people living in sin affect your life? Right, it doesnt. If anything Jesus said to love thy neighbor (not be a holier than thou self-righteous prick). But you must've been asleep during that lecture in Sunday school.
Voin 1 weeks
Armando: 1) my post was an obvious spoof of the "religion is like a penis" atheist meme, but it seems your humor detection mechanism is on the fritz lately. 2) how is an admonishment to "not shove your X down ppl's throat" being a "self-righteous prick"? If anyone is guilty of the latter, it's these authoritarian, proselytizing queers specifically targeting Christian bakeries (but suspiciously not Muslim ones) w/ their political b/s to get the lawsuit $ and muh victimhood attention
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
You realize that some people don't sit around reading enough means to be as familiar with them as you are right? Just because we happen to be talking on the Internet doesn't mean that either of us live here

Voin 1 weeks
A few years ago, the cultural consensus seemed to be "consenting adults, not my business", & that seemed to work for most people. What I can't stand is when arrogant, self-righteous assholes fo around *making* it everyone else's business.
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
You make your religion everyone else's business when you arbitrarily impose old testament rules on strangers. If you're going to pull out arcane rules, don't cherry pick. Be consistent and apply all of them - TO YOURSELF.
Voin 1 weeks
Armando... what the hell are you talking about?🤔 Who but the Islamists is doing that? I've consistently advocated for separation of church & state. If you want to go attack your favorite strawmen instead of staying on topic, I'm sure there's antitheist forums you can go jerk off to.
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
@armando, I'm sorry the religious people hurt you but hostility won't get us anywhere. And voin is pretty reasonable once you get to know them.

Voin 1 weeks
Enough with the disingenuous "Christians hate queers, REEEE!" strawmanning already. I have gay friends who don't support gay marriage b/c they don't think it's any of the government's business. Compelling 👏 speech 👏 is👏 unacceptable. 👏
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
Leftist Anarchists are an excellent example of supporting gays but not the institution of marriage. most anarchists I know think gay marriage is a step back.
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
I'm sorry if you don't understand my broader point which actually goes to the heart of the issue: This whole opposition of homosexuality by the Christian church is a sham. It is all based on one line in Leviticus. As I already pointed out, there are plenty of other sins in the Bible yet no one discriminates based on breaking the 5th commandment or 7th commandment (and these are actual commandments!). Only that sinners from that passage in Leviticus get treated this way? Why? This is my point: They arbitrarily cherry pick which religious belief to be offended by. That's not a breach of their religious beliefs, otherwise they would refuse service far more often. And to make matters worse, the behavior of a sinner their doing business has absolutely nothing to do with their own salvation.

Talûn-karkû The Warchief 1 weeks
I'm bisexual, and an atheist I agree with the ruling

Voin 1 weeks
Regressive Left: "How *dare* you criticize Kaepernick for kneeling during the anthem?! It's his *right*! Forced patriotism is no patriotism at all!" Also the Regressive Left: "I have a right to make the government put a gun to your head and FORCE you to say/write/think my political dogma, REEEEE!"
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
Links?

Voin 1 weeks
If authoritarian queers can't handle living in normal society without constantly sticking their gayness in everyone's business, then maybe we can build a special "safe space" just for them, secure with barbed wire fences and armed guards to keep the icky cishets out. They can even get special symbols for their clothing to identify them them to their fellow queers & make sure no "oppressive cisheteronormative constructs" infiltrate their camp. 🐸👌
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
Point to the section of the Bible that says you can't bake a cake for a gay person (or do business with them). Oh you can't? If i didn't know any better, I'd say you pulled that rule out of your arse!
Voin 1 weeks
Why do you keep strawmanning, Armando? Is it because you don't have an actual argument against the position being discussed? Would you be fine with a Muslim bakery forced to make a "remove kebab" cake out of bacon?
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
@armando would you have a gay baker make a cake that says "Die faggot"? Obviously not. Should straight people abjudicate gay lifes? No. But that's not remotely what this article is about. *Ps - I can say that, it's our word lol

Armando Martinez 1 weeks
The Bible says a man shall not "lay down with another man". Nowhere in the Bible does it say you are not to do business with a man that lays down with another man. If you're going to pull out Old Testament rules, then there's all sorts arbritrary things you can't do (wear clothing of different material, eating shellfish, eating pork). So now you can refuse to do business with somebody that eats shellfish? Ridiculous. I think it sets a bad precedent to allow people to use religious beliefs as an excuse not to do business with someone. That baker could've simply said "no" and given any number of reasons (or no reason at all) and it would've been perfectly acceptable. So now a muslim uber driver can refuse to give you a ride because you've been drinking, a baptist hotel keeper can refuse to rent a room to unmarried couples, a scientologist doctor can refuse to prescribe you psychiatric drugs, a Jehovah witness surgeon can legally refuse to give you a blood transfusion. What a mess.
Majesticwalker 1 weeks
No matter the reason given, the reason assumed is the one that would matter. Sorry to burst your bubble on this. But just because I say I don't want to do something for a reason I make up, whether it's the real reason or not, doesn't mean you'll accept that reason as the real reason I'm saying no. Example: You ask me to bake a cake, and I do. But then you ask me to decorate it with "Support Gay Marriage". I say no, because I don't have the time, as I'm busy. If you're gay, there's a chance that you'll take that as me just making an excuse, while the real reason, in your eyes, that I just won't do it because you're gay. Sure, the other way is also possible, that you'll accept it and move on.. But the fact of the matter is that anyone willing to sue over this won't have the latter response/acceptance. This type of thing happens all the time in the real world, with all types of people. It's not hard to make up a small lie to attempt to avoid trouble.
Alex Stovall 1 weeks
He didn't refuse the cake he refused to make a custom cake with support gay marriage on it. That's reasonable. Why would he want people to say that that cake came from his bakery when he dosent support that. His product reflects on his business and personal character
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
@Alex, ok so that's more of a gray area. I may not be so opposed to that idea but just the general idea of using religious beliefs is a murky concept that creates all sorts of conundrums. In the words of John Kasich, "If you're in business to do business then do that. Just say a prayer and wish them well."

Voin 1 weeks
The "gay" thing is just a smokescreen, this is about *compelled speech*, like Bill C16 in Canada
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
There are all sorts of things that are prohibited in the Bible (especially Old Testament). Drinking is wicked, premarital sex is a sin, not honoring your parents, adultery, not keeping the sabbath. Why do you get to single people out on this particular sin? What about this particular sin gives you free license to judge & discriminate?
Voin 1 weeks
Armando, I'm just gonna start reporting your strawmanning as spam, k, b/c it's clear you're not actually trying to listen
Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
@voin Just be aware that we only remove comments when required by law and since there arent comment moderators, don't expect much to happen.

Voin 1 weeks
@Danielle, Armando: So you'd be ok w/ someone forcing a Jewish bakery to make a cake that says: "Happy Birthday Mein Führor #HitlerDidNothingWrong Arbeit macht frei, Gas the Kikes 卐卐卐1488卐卐卐"?🤔 Because I have a problem w/ the State compelling speech.
Danielle Dovahsdottir 1 weeks
@Voin, So ur good with ppl refusing service to blacks, women and anyone else then too, right? No one is forcing them to have a business. But if u have one, u serve all.
Voin 1 weeks
I'm against compelled speech and for freedom of association.
Armando Martinez 1 weeks
So you're ok with a muslim keeping her head scarf on for her driver's license photo based on her religious beliefs? Oh i see, but that's religious freedom, isn't it?

Chase 1 weeks
""To me, this was never about conscience or a statement. All I wanted to do was to order a cake in a shop," [Gareth Lee] said." Just where does this guy live that he literally has to sue a bakery just to have three words forming a generic political statement put on a cake? According to the judge, the owners were still willing to serve him, did they also refuse to just sell him the Ernie and Bert cake without words so he could buy the frosting to write it himself? Were there absolutely no other bakeries within any reasonable distance who were willing to write the message? I dunno the area he lives in, but it seems like if all he wanted waa a cake he'd have it within the hour of being refused by the original bakers...
DKO 1 weeks
Yeah, bullshit. If all he wanted was a cake, he could just go to another bakery, instead of filing a lawsuit. This was absolutely motivated by the american case, I bet he kept calling bakeries until he found one to refuse him. Just like the american baker, I bet this baker will continue to be the target of harassment, until driven into bankruptcy.

Ricardo Higuera de Salinas 1 weeks
Danielle, you apparently are brain-tied to your false analogy that refusing to express something in writing which violates your religious beliefs is the same as refusing ANY service to a gay (or black or whatever) person. They are NOT the same thing, no matter how many times you claim they are.

Jackie Fox MOD 1 weeks
As a member of the LGBT plus community I totally agree with this ruling. If he had refused to make him any cake that would be a completely different scenario in terms of discrimination
Talûn-karkû The Warchief 1 weeks
same

Danielle Dovahsdottir 1 weeks
You serve all the public, or you serve none. Unless a person is stealing, or causing violence in your store, you should have to serve them. Invoking personal beliefs is no different than refusing service because one dislikes blacks.
Covfefe_riot 1 weeks
No you're not serving the public. That's why it's called the "private sector"
Danielle Dovahsdottir 1 weeks
@Cov, Oh, so ur good with discrimination against blacks, women and anyone else then too right?
Anthony Beaton 1 weeks
Danielle, you don't really hold or believe that is general principle or value that must be adhered to. I am sure there are many examples and contexts where you would agree with discrimination. Re your question on is it ok to not serve X, I dont think it is ok but I do think it should be allowed. Based on principle. Just because I dont like something doesn't mean I am going to say it should be banned. I also don't think any business is going to be successful if they choose that path you describe.