Bakers who refused to make 'gay cake' say they felt 'victimised'

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

On the contrary - the bakers’ defence throughout has been that they were nothing of the sort. They have said so under oath. It is no mere assumption to hold that position with regard to this case.

This has always been an argument that an individual cannot be compelled to speak contrary to their conscience. The bakers have stated repeatedly that they were happy to sell the plaintiff any cake in their shop but that they would not create a product containing a slogan contrary to their own sincerely held religious belief.

Compelled speech is, and must always be, prevented in law.

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------



I would be surprised if they are allowed to bring a fresh case on new grounds. It would ultimately be the same complaint, just with different legal arguments to be presented. Were they to try, it’s likely Ashers’ lawyers would move to have them declared vexatious litigants, which is not something you want against your name.

I said "their choice of bakers", so who did you think I was referring to as "their"? How could "their" refer to the bakers?

You're assuming that the complainants raison d'etre isn't to be "vexatious litigants". It started over 7 years ago, so what isn't "vexatious" about that?

Originally Posted by nomadking

I said "their choice of bakers", so who did you think I was referring to as "their"? How could "their" refer to the bakers?

You're assuming that the complainants raison d'etre isn't to be "vexatious litigants". It started over 7 years ago, so what isn't "vexatious" about that?

Apologies … I read your words back to front and thought you were discussing the bakers’ motivation when you were actually referring to the complainant.

As to the other issue, it’s not vexatious to pursue appeals through the process set down in law, all the way to the Supreme Court if the legal arguments justify it (which clearly they did here).

However, for them to now go back to the county court (or whatever its equivalent in NI) would in my view be vexatious. The complainant felt injured and had a range of options when it came to persuading the court to side with him. If his legal team made bad arguments then that’s his loss.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

Apologies … I read your words back to front and thought you were discussing the bakers’ motivation when you were actually referring to the complainant.

As to the other issue, it’s not vexatious to pursue appeals through the process set down in law, all the way to the Supreme Court if the legal arguments justify it (which clearly they did here).

However, for them to now go back to the county court (or whatever its equivalent in NI) would in my view be vexatious. The complainant felt injured and had a range of options when it came to persuading the court to side with him. If his legal team made bad arguments then that’s his loss.

Over £250,000 being spent just by the NI Equality Commission, along with the costs of other people/organisations, over a cake costing £36.50, isn't vexatious?

Originally Posted by nomadking

Over £250,000 being spent just by the NI Equality Commission, along with the costs of other people/organisations, over a cake costing £36.50, isn't vexatious?

No - vexatious has a particular meaning in law, and it wouldn’t apply to the process so far.

It most definitely is ridiculous though, and it leaves me wondering whether the complainant might have taken offence rather more easily than it was offered.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

No - vexatious has a particular meaning in law, and it wouldn’t apply to the process so far.

It most definitely is ridiculous though, and it leaves me wondering whether the complainant might have taken offence rather more easily than it was offered.

As is all to often, there was no offence involved, just being awkward, bullying, and vindictive.

[Julian]

Originally Posted by nomadking

As is all too often, people not seeing past the headline.
Once he does that in the UK, it starts all over again. The grounds used to bring the case to the ECHR, hadn't been brought before the UK courts.

Ultimately they didn't discriminate against him as a customer, they just weren't prepared to produce that specific item. Just as halal-only Subways are (illegally) allowed to operate.

I did read the whole article thank you son.

Hence "appears"

Wind your neck in.

[Pierre]

Excellent.

We can all move on. He can choose to take his business elsewhere and they can choose to bake something that doesn’t make them feel uncomfortable.

As it should be.

Is the cake shop still in business?

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:46 ----------

EDIT: Appears so: https://www.ashersbakingco.com/

Bigger than I thought, I had assumed it was a small shop and therefore this publicity/legal trouble might have been too much. Seems they're doing fine though.

Originally Posted by Pierre

We can all move on. He can choose to take his business elsewhere and they can choose to bake something that doesn’t make them feel uncomfortable.

As should have happened 7 [or whatever] years ago, instead of all this legal nonsense.

[jfman]

The lawyers can go to cake shops and ask for cakes with £50 note designs on them. Lots of them.

[Blackshep]

This is a blast from the past I always thought this was a setup by someone who knew the religious position of the bakers and wanted to create a situation. Good to hear the shops still in business despite this faux outrage of the idiot that started all this.

Originally Posted by Damien

Is the cake shop still in business?

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:46 ----------

EDIT: Appears so: https://www.ashersbakingco.com/

Bigger than I thought, I had assumed it was a small shop and therefore this publicity/legal trouble might have been too much. Seems they're doing fine though.

All publicity is good publicity in a fair number of cases.

I agree with the ruling in the end that you can't compel someone to create a message and it's not the same as refusing service.

That said given the size of the business, multiple stores and a supplier for supermarkets, I do wonder why someone else in the business couldn't make the cake? I originally thought it was a single, independent, baker run by this couple and they personally had to bake it against their religious beliefs.

If you're religious and you run a business is it the case that those values should flow down the entire company? That the business itself cannot produce the cake irrespective of the personal beliefs of the person actually writing that message?

[tweetiepooh]

Originally Posted by Damien

I agree with the ruling in the end that you can't compel someone to create a message and it's not the same as refusing service.

That said given the size of the business, multiple stores and a supplier for supermarkets, I do wonder why someone else in the business couldn't make the cake? I originally thought it was a single, independent, baker run by this couple and they personally had to bake it against their religious beliefs.

If you're religious and you run a business is it the case that those values should flow down the entire company? That the business itself cannot produce the cake irrespective of the personal beliefs of the person actually writing that message?

That could get to be a slippery slope. If the basic ethos of the business is in line with the individuals then beliefs may be part of the whole.

Originally Posted by Damien

I agree with the ruling in the end that you can't compel someone to create a message and it's not the same as refusing service.

That said given the size of the business, multiple stores and a supplier for supermarkets, I do wonder why someone else in the business couldn't make the cake? I originally thought it was a single, independent, baker run by this couple and they personally had to bake it against their religious beliefs.

If you're religious and you run a business is it the case that those values should flow down the entire company? That the business itself cannot produce the cake irrespective of the personal beliefs of the person actually writing that message?

It’s not unusual for a business to have an ethos which it expects its employees to have due regard to. There are plenty of companies, for example, that explicitly identify themselves as vegan and cite ethical reasons for being so. They may or may not insist their employees are vegan (though that might not be legal) but they will expect employees to toe the line and be sufficiently in sympathy with the company’s aims and objectives to be able to do their jobs, whether that be product design, communication, sales or marketing or whatever.