“It may seem that writing in icing on a cake is a trivial form of expression…”

As Alan mentioned in his post on the Court of Appeal ruling against Ashers Baking Company yesterday, noted legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg, describing the ruling as “surprisingly straightforward”, outlined the judges reasoning

…if a business does supply a service, it must not discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation — which means it must not refuse to provide a gay person with goods that it would provide to others.

In this case, said the courts, the correct comparison was not with a straight man who wanted a “gay” cake, which Ashers would have refused. It was with a gay or straight person who ordered a cake celebrating traditional marriage — which the company would have supplied.

And, as the appeal judges said, “the fact that a baker provides a cake for a particular team or portrays witches on a Halloween cake does not indicate any support for either.”

But, given the circumstances of the original cake order, I’m not entirely convinced by that argument, or the analogy.  Neither is this Guardian editorial

The law against discrimination says that they may not refuse service to anyone because of their sexual orientation. That’s entirely right. It is further arguable that they should not be able to discriminate against anyone because of their political views. But what is at stake here – as Peter Tatchell has pointed out – is also a principle of free speech. They were being asked to make a statement in favour of gay marriage with which they profoundly disagreed. And here they ought to have had the right to disagree.

It may seem that writing in icing on a cake is a trivial form of expression compared to, say, writing in a national newspaper. But it is still the clear expression of an opinion, and that is something that should not be compelled any more than it should be suppressed. The medium does not here affect the message. Suppose the bakery had been approached to produce a cake iced with the old Paisleyite slogan “Save Ulster from Sodomy”. Most decent people would applaud a refusal to reproduce such bigotry. Yet from the perspective of free speech, the principle is exactly the same. If free speech is not the right to be wrong it means nothing at all. Everyone has the right to their opinion but there is no right to compel other people to amplify or even reproduce it.

, , , , , , ,

  • Thought Criminal

    QED on the thought police active here at Slugger:
    http://imgur.com/a/HGE5y

  • Theelk11

    Hi Stugo
    Genuinely happy for your conversion at 41 we all have to get to sleep at night and I’m happy you have found a way to do so.

    Evolution theory is that the creature that adapts to a sudden change in its environment will succeed .
    So not the strongest or the fastest. Just the best adapted.
    For that reason there are no missing links.
    Modern man along with his his Neanderthal first cousins adapted the environment to allow all to prevail.
    They developed strong social bonds and developed an ability to put themselves inside the mind of a fellow being who was suffering or happy. It was a brilliant evolutionary trait
    The Christ made it trendy but he was by no means the first.
    So stop talking like your something special.

    Yours in mortal sin
    An elk in rutting season……

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Could either you or Stugo please explain the relationship between the western globalists and the various groups of people whom you and stugo refer to as ‘marxists’?

    We have seen a video posted on here that ‘explains’ ‘Marxist’ attempts to subvert the west and this is somehow to be seen as proof of Western gloabalist Marxism?

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    There’s something very Parker-Stone-esque about these arguments isn’t there? (The Southpark creators)

  • hotdogx

    Guys this is simple, neo nazism is a illegal entity, being gay or a gay organization is certainly not illegal well in a normal country such as the republic, in this case the waterfront, mansion house would be in their rights to refuse.

  • Gaygael

    Yes. There is a recent flux of them. They do seem obsessed with LGBT stuff.

  • Gaygael

    Some additional info here. This is specific to gay and bisexual men. There is even less historical data on women and trans people

    https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005261

  • grumpy oul man

    Don’t even start him on global warming (a conspricy by the scientific community, doesn’t give a reason for this conspricy ) and being used by “liberals” ( regards Stalin and Hitler as part ot the liberal PC crowd) and his view of history would be worthy of monty python if they where on acid.
    On the LGBT community, well i suspect he thinks they are just confused and made a wrong call.

  • I replied to it, so it’s either disappeared or in a different place.

    I’m not going to repeat myself, other than to say that Haeckel made those fraudulent embryo diagrams to pretend that humans (and other creatures) go through a ‘fish’ stage.

    I believe Hitler was a big fan of his.

    As to your last point, do you want murder legalised for everyone? We had something in the UK called the ‘Liverpool Care Pathway’ where hospital patients were starved or dehydrated to death.

    That’s what happens with your way of thinking. Sieg heil, eh?

  • An inoffensive group? Are you ‘aving a larf? This blog post is about the utterly disgusting treatment by a homosexual towards decent Christian people. Inoffensive!!

    I keep asking you to watch the video so you will stop asking me things he explains and he should know. If you don’t want to know and you don’t want to watch the video – it’s even timed to start at the ‘equailty’ bit – then just shut up please.

    “Globalists are not Marxists”

    [Sigh] But they impose socialism on society to keep us in line.

    Just because you can’t be bothered to study politics or anything much, don’t mention ‘tinfoil hats.’. Trusting sheep like you are why society is in this mess. You need a brain, not a hat.

  • “Why take my word?”

    “I don’t”

    That was my point. You ‘dip your toe in’ yet you come on here talking about things about which you have no idea with someone with wide experience.

    I think that’s delusion. You are deluding yourself that you can debate with me and you refuse even to watch part of a video which would help you. Why are you even debating me? Are you that bored?

    “I’m saying it’s more believable than Genesis.”

    You understand neither then.

    “So everything has been rigged to show that the world is billions of years old?”

    Long ages was around (in modern times) decades before Darwin. It was not based on science. Uniformitarianism (the present is the key to the past) is a philosophy.

    It made evolution theory possible by making the time, but it is not scientific, hence the neo-catastophism of today.

  • Where do you think laws come from? In most of Africa, the law is that homosexual behaviour is illegal. In Muslim countries, you can be hanged for it. As you are such a fan of the ‘law’ I assume you approve?

  • Oh, Wikipedia. I tried editing a page a year or two ago and was hounded by about a dozen people who were changing what I had written and were ‘verbally’ abusing me as well. It was about the benefits of an essential oil – nothing too controversial, you might imagine.

    Wikipedia is a fake IMO. How to get people to believe crud like you have just reproduced. Kinsey was a well-know fraud. I suggest you find reliable sources. I know I have quoted Wikipedia, but I assume they wouldn’t be deliberately non-PC so it’s probably true in the case of Roy Jenkins.

  • She wanted her unborn baby to die? Be careful what you wish for.

  • And we can see how people are less ‘equal’ than for a long time. A friend who was director of a college a few years ago told me that a government diversity officer gave the directors a talk on equality. The emphasis, of course, was about alien religions and sexualities and the usual guff. At the end, my friend asked ‘what about Christianity’? The diversity man said that it’s not important (I think he was much more rude than that).

    We need fairness, not equality. I don’t see all those millionaire MPs willing to give what they have to the poor.

  • I agree with most of that. It is the trendy left – those who have laid out their towels on the moral high ground and refuse to hear any other view because they are right and that’s that – who love watching their country go down the pan. It is quite a phenomenon.

    I think Putin must be part of the globalist scam. I can’t see how he would be in that position (and for so long) otherwise.

  • Go to ‘share’ and it gives you that option.

  • Remember: these lefties are dainty, precious little creatures, who are always right and never wrong.

    Disgusting censorship. Who needs a Stasi, the government’s useful idiots are everywhere, brainwashed into taking offence.

  • I thought it was too good to be true – a pleasant evolutionist on the internet. What a pompous article you are, stalking the internet to spread your ‘wisdom’.

    You have spouted tosh, other than that it is the best adapted that survive.

    Get a life.

  • Korhomme

    How then would you have managed her?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Interestingly, Stugo, during ten years contributing to Wikipedia, I was only “hounded” once, by someone with very strange views whose views were quickly challenged by others with more a scrupulious approach. Going from the sort of unsupportable assertions you have posted here, I’m not really surprised at what you say of your experience there. From my experience the adjudication of comments is informed and objectivly careful to challenge any sillyness that a new would be contributer might try to put over, all contributions requiring support from research which has been fully “peer reviewed”.

    Of course you find what it says unacceptable! Pretty much all ytaht stands the test of time on Wikipedia (such as my own work) is soundly based on proper research citation rather than on personal fantasy concocted from what used to be called “Yellow Press” absurdities.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    “An inoffensive group? Are you ‘aving a larf? ”

    In general that is exactly what they are, alas people tend to focus on extremists and label the entire community according to their actions.

    “This blog post is about the utterly disgusting treatment by a homosexual towards decent Christian people. Inoffensive!!”

    You said it yourself; “A homosexuall” ergo not ALL or even MOST or even A LOT of homosexuals, so the group in this particular case (which you cite as evidence in your accusation) is almost entirely free of blame from this (shameful) episode with the exception of ONE man and presumably a few advocates and associates. So yes, in general an inoffensive group.

    I keep asking you to watch the video so you will stop asking me things he explains and he should know. If you don’t want to know and you don’t want to watch the video – it’s even timed to start at the ‘equailty’ bit – then just shut up please.

    I watched the first part (that you kindly fast forwarded it to) twice. Still my questions remain as you see something quite different from what I do, hence the questions (albeit unanswered ones).

    “[Sigh] But they impose socialism on society to keep us in line.”

    Well, given the upping of free market practices the past two decades then it’s safe to say they’re doing a terrible job of imposing socialism.

    “Just because you can’t be bothered to study politics or anything much, don’t mention ‘tinfoil hats”

    Another frustrated generalisation, you’ve no idea what I do or don’t study and I certainly wouldn’t be giving it the “no flies on me treatment” from 11 years of biased research.

    “Trusting sheep like you are why society is in this mess. You need a brain, not a hat.”
    Sheep jump at the first shepherd offering them pasture; I find your pasture no more appealing than those of Scientology, radical Islam or any other advocates of the “just listen to me you blind fools!” school of non-thought.
    What you have works for you, great, some of us need a little bit more than paranoia and youtube links.

  • How can you be ‘surprised’? No wonder Wikipedia is a right-on, leftie, atheistic trash-can of lies.

    I provided plenty of links, but the only thing most people wanted to concentrate on was the US Government’s ‘downgrading’ of this particular oil which has been known for centuries around the world for being helpful in certain circumstances.

    Yes, the minions came out to denounce me for going against the US Gov’t. Objective evidence didn’t come into it as far as most people were concerned.

    From the evidence of comments here, it is clear that the majority of people are deeply brainwashed into the globalist, green, LGBT fantasy world; a land that truth forgot.

  • “…alas people tend to focus on extremists and label the entire community according to their actions.”

    Unfortunately, the extremists in the Asher’s case were the ‘equality’ (haha) people, but that’s what has happened agter half a century of conditioning and bullying.

    I have only heard Tatchell condemn the decision. Where are the others who supposedly craved equality?

    “Well, given the upping of free market practices the past two decades
    then it’s safe to say they’re doing a terrible job of imposing
    socialism.”

    You think smoking bans, other bans, draconian planning regs, state guardians for children, high tax rates, large government obsessed with monitoring and controlling us is a free market economy full of liberty?

    You don’t know what ideology I am railing against because, somehow,, you didn’t understand what Mr Bezmenev was talking about. Might I suggest you watch it from the start? It is entertaining as well as informative.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    It is not simply amatter of “links.” Such evidence as you offer must be from reputable, if possible academic, sources. So, “a right-on, leftie, atheistic trash-can of lies”…..ho, hummmmm………

    A usual start source for Wikipedia articles where the theme is not entirely dependant on current research is frequently the much respected The Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition (1910–11).

  • One of my sources was the Enc. Brit (recent). I’m talking about a subject almost as old as the hills with even mainstream chemists stocking the oil for a particular use. My conclusion was that medicines not made by the Pharmers were to be dissed on Wikipediia.

    I still don’t know how so many angry ‘editors’ appeared on the scene, all desperate to denigrate a popular remedy on the supposed ‘downgrading’ on some US Gov. website.

    I suggest that Jimmy Wales asks Congress for the money he needs, although I expect he already gets plenty of taxpayers’ money to dish out the propaganda. It made me wary of anything on Wikipedia.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    “Unfortunately, the extremists in the Asher’s case were the ‘equality’ (haha) people, but that’s what has happened agter half a century of conditioning and bullying.”

    Yes they are in this case and as I said earlier I think they were wrong to do so and indeed they’ve merely shot themselves in the collective LGBT foot as they’ve given the DUP a shot in the arm regarding the PoC.

    “I have only heard Tatchell condemn the decision. Where are the others who supposedly craved equality?”

    Well, if they’re at all like the vast majority of gay people I’ve encountered in my life they’re most probably keeping their head down and trying not to attract unwanted attention.

    You think smoking bans, other bans, draconian planning regs, state guardians for children, high tax rates, large government obsessed with monitoring and controlling us is a free market economy full of liberty?”

    Nope.

    “You don’t know what ideology I am railing against because, somehow,, you didn’t understand what Mr Bezmenev was talking about.”

    You’re (in this instance) railing against gay equality legislation and see it is a subversive Marxist plot and I disagree with this.

    There may be other things that you rail against that I am in agreement with e.g. safe spaces, single sex toilets, the shouting down of debate by called people homophobes, or racists or islamophobes and the lefty-hysteria demonstrated by the likes of ‘Twiggly-puff’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFrZsGbO6N0

    If these are things that you rail against then I support you but not everything is so black-white, Marxist-capitalist, left-right or indeed has their roots in a Marxist plot, indeed, as Brezemov says near the start of his video when asked if he believes all such things are the fruit of KGB propaganda he says “not necessarily”

    I see it as a case of some seeds of commie idealism in some cases unsurprisingly found some fertile ground in an already left-progressing world (post 40’s) and we are seeing the natural progression of lefty thought whether it be facilitated by KGB ideas or not.

    You see Marxist plot whereas I’d say Marxist eulogy would be more (but not completely) apt.

    The pendulum will stop at some point and start to swing back to the right but that doesn’t mean we have to be mean to gays.

    “Might I suggest you watch it from the start? It is entertaining as well as informative”
    I already did and I interpret things quite differently from yourself.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    If you think Putin is a ‘Marxist-Leninist’ you are sadly mistaken. He is no fan of LGBT people. Perhaps it is you who are part of the “bovine public”.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    “your angle of debate is no different from an extremist of any other religious hue.”

    Not exactly – it is much more confused than most of these diatribes.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    You seem to have mislaid your tinfoil hat. Can I recommend that you replace it ASAP?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Mention of the ‘Book of Revelation’ puts the tin lid on it.

  • “You’re (in this instance) railing against gay equality legislation and
    see it is a subversive Marxist plot and I disagree with this.”

    ‘Gays’ have equality. I don’t see demanding somebody makes a contract with you that you don’t want or ‘gay marriage’ as part of that equality. That’s a takeover of established mores and morality.

    Yes, I agree with you about those other issues. I used to be a big fan of PJW and Infowars (I used to get articles on their sites)
    but I consider them disinfo agents now.

    “The pendulum will stop at some point and start to swing back to the right but that doesn’t mean we have to be mean to gays.”

    As I said to you or someone else who asked what the ‘endgame’ was, it is the global Beast system, so perhaps no swing back to reality until Judgment Day.

    I have no wish to be mean to gays, but they are just being used and who knows what their ‘status’ will be in the future. That pendulum might very well swing back with a vengeance.

    I don’t want to be mean, but at the same time, I cannot accept their way of life as normal, virtuous, healthy, desirable or conducive to a strong, safe and happy society..

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Best explanation yet.

  • I know Putin’s alleged stance. If he is for real then he knows that homosexuality is a destructive force in any society and he wants his country to be strong.

  • Can I suggest you improve your vocabulary and stop using insults which were old hat twenty years ago?

  • Repent or rot in Hell in agony for all eternity. You choose.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Just so you can’t say you haven’t been told, the National Socialist state in Germany was ‘socialist’ in name only. But don’t let reality get in your bigoted right-wing way.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Extremely well said.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Lunacy personified.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    It’s a good try, but there is no way reason can defeat un-reason.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    It’s people like you who give God a bad name.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Do you think that if you had been born in Saudi Arabia, you would still have become a christian?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    If you are really a christian, will you love your gay neighbour ‘as yourself’ as you are commanded?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Same sex relationships are common throughout the animal world, and we are no exception. Same sex relationships likewise were accepted without comment in many previous societies. The fact that ‘gay marriage is unusual has more to do with the definition of marriage as a means of property transfer than anything else.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    “You think it’s funny that people are bullied, vilified and hung out to dry for their” sexual orientation?

    “you thought that” christian bigots “ruling the world was a permanent fixture?”

    Yours is a dying belief system. Good riddance.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Exactly.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    If you are just going to declare that a load of undiluted rubbish is a ‘fact’, without any reasonable supporting evidence, then there seems little point in having any converse with you except for the (limited) amusement value.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Absolutely – you make it clear as a bell. Don’t expect to be heard by some of the audience here, though.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    “If I want to provide a service in line with my beliefs, I’ll do so.” and if by doing so you contravene the law you will in turn be prosecuted, hopefully.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    I’m sure there are lots of criminals who will agree wholeheartedly with you. They want to be free to kill, rob, etc without hindrance. They will have your support, I presume?

    Crazy right-wing nonsense!

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    I imagine they would have been happy to do so.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    But no-one has the right to discriminate in providing their publicly available services on the grounds of the clients race or religion or legally held beliefs.

    I give up now – it’s like shooting fish in a barrel – not even sporting.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Look, I try to be succinct. There is a wide range of human belief about an even wider range of subjects. A plotted analysis of the whole range on any particular subject would probably result in the well known ‘bell-curve’ showing mainstream and out-lying opinions. Your opinions as expressed here lie well out on the fringes of unexamined right-wing paranoia, bigotry and lunacy.

    I hope that that the foregoing uses acceptable vocabulary, and as far as I can see it refers to still current opinion.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    What gives you this truly amazing conviction that you are right and those who disagree with you are wrong? And don’t give me some guff about God speaking to you, because he never said that sort of thing to me.

  • Theelk11

    Sorry your offended, you are under heavy attack on here I didn’t mean to sound pompous.
    It’s a free website if you find my opinion tosh then you might understand how others feel of yours.
    Can you explain your last sentence? I have a wonderful life, free from fear and hate how about you?

  • Where did you come from, troll?

  • Do you think that if you had been born in Saudi Arabia, you would still have become a troll?

  • Of course I love my gay neighbours. Trolls are harder to love.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Oooohh! Troll, is it? Given the contentious and ridiculous statements in your posts, which are obviously there only to wind people up, I admire your cheek.

  • Well done – you finally sank to the depths of ‘let’s behave like animals’.

    I assume you also defecate in the street, go out naked, etc.?

  • Haha – you don ‘t even have the ‘amusement value’.

  • What’s this now, troll? You’re the biggest troll I’ve ever seen. Somebody must be paying you.

    It is my right to discriminate against whom I like. You are barred from my business. OK?

  • Troll.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Ahh. You’re starting to lose it now. Always a danger when you get emotionally attached to your arguments.

    Seriously though, to get back to the point I made elsewhere, do you think that if you had been born in Saudi Arabia, that you would have become a christian?

    The only reason you are one is that you happened to be born in NI, or at least had christian parents. All religions are just conditioning regimes, relevant mostly only to those born into them. So it really beats me why the conditionees (to coin a word) are so convinced that only they have a hot line to the truth. Care to discuss?

    PS Please point out where in my post I say ‘let’s behave like animals’ – I can only see that phrase in your post. If you want to start writing my posts for me you will have to up your game a bit.

  • “Sorry your offended.”

    I doubt it, otherwise why compound it?

    Who said anything about ‘hate’? Yet again you smug atheists show your supreme lack of understanding?

  • You are a troll, and that is a word I practically never use, because you leave one sneaky, worthless, insulting comment of no interest to anyone under each of my posts.

  • You’ve lost it, troll, if you think you can behave like an animal and not attract criticism.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    I think you are getting a bit emotional now. Not really helpful.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Hmm. Logic not your strong point I see.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    So you’re not a very good christian then?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    You seem to be getting more and more detached from any kind of rational argument. Proves my point.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Mildly amusing. Keep going.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    What business is that? Fantasy publishing?

  • You should look up the word “rational” then try to internalise it.

  • I do truly feel sorry for people like you. Unless you learn to adopt a more serious approach, respect others’ opinion and are prepared to learn then your understanding will never advance.

  • Abucs

    What is happening Seaan is that a lot of people are starting to realise they have little respect for the law which seems to have taken on political correctness as its religion.

    If somebody comes to you wanting to bake a cake celebrating female circumcision then a bakery should have every right to decline. It is not credible for the law to step in and say you must bake such a cake because they deem female circumcision as the same as male circumcision and therefore you are discriminating against Muslims (a protected class) if you decline.

    This is the analogy. Those who have accepted the religion of political correctness cannot see the problem because it is their faith which they believe is correct. It is increasingly becoming the faith of the law. Hence an increasing disrespect of law and politics.

    Christianity worked to end slavery, worked to end apartheid and worked to end segregation. Political correctness was not a factor and it is nothing more than a recent replacement religion that is both incoherent and dangerous.

  • Abucs

    That is the problem. “Being told” is not the same as truth, except to the authoritarian.

    So i assume you are of the left like so many other authoritarians

    You know the ones who make the state the all powerful arbiter of its citizens, its economy, its education, its social institutions and morality, then put themselves at the head of the state.

    The ones who advocate for a fairer share of wealth and then have killed large numbers of their own citizens because they won’t worship the ideological state. The ones that want to usurp or kill all opposition like religion.

    Like…. a certain Socialist German last century comes to mind … what’s his name again? ….. Starts with ‘H’.

  • “…he never said that sort of thing to me.”

    Do you honestly wonder why? Seriously? You are a mocker. If you are prepared to humble yourself, you can understand so much more than someone in your present condition.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    How about an answer to the question?

  • Abucs

    Good answer to a silly question.

  • Abucs

    I think there are different types of people who could be described as western globalists. There are people who own large businesses who like cheaper wages but these people are not Marxists. These people are not much bothered if their companies are set up in cheaper countries or if people migrate to western countries and work for less.

    Then there are Marxists who want open borders (globalists) for two reasons:

    firstly they see individual national cultures as the forces that have traditionally stopped their utopia and they work to break down and dismiss national culture. This is where Hitler and Mussolini parted ways with the Russians (National Socialism).

    Secondly they need a constant flow of poorer people to garnish votes from because as time goes on the original population wise up to the incoherence and danger of their philosophy. If Marxists don’t have a population they can pretend are downtrodden and persecuted then their philosophy fails. They use anger and false righteousness to manipulate voters and they need a population to fit their philosophy. Mass migration and open borders keeps alive their divisive rhetoric and self declared righteousness.

    Of course there is some overlap between both sets of globalists which is why the west has seen massive immigration over the last 40 years not encouraged in any other part of the world.

Join us for the Slugger End of Year Review Show, Wed 14th Dec 2016
Get your tickets